DESIGNING, IMPLEMENTING, AND EVALUATINGTHE IMPACT OF SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES:​A TOOLKIT FOR IOM AND ITS PARTNERS...

The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the International Organization for
Migration (IOM). The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout the report do not imply expression of any opinion
whatsoever on the part of IOM concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning its frontiers orboundaries.
​IOM is committed to the principle that humane and orderly migration benefits migrants and society. As an intergovernmental organization, IOM
acts with its partners in the international community to: assist in meeting the operational challenges of migration; advance understanding of
migration issues; encourage social and economic development through migration; and uphold the human dignity and well-being of migrants.
_____________________________The publication is made possible through the Migration Resource Allocation Committee (MiRAC). Contributors to the MiRAC include: Austria,
Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark, France, Ireland, Lithuania, the Kingdom of Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the Philippines, Qatar Fund forDevelopment, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United States of America. The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors​anddo not necessarily reflect the views of the Migration Resource​Allocation Committee (MiRAC) or its contributors.

Publisher:
Regional Office for South-Eastern Europe, Eastern Europe and Central Asia
Dampfschiffstrasse 4 / 10-111030 Vienna
Austria
Tel.: +43 1 581 22 22
Email: rovienna@iom.int
Website: https://rovienna.iom.int/​​This publication was issued without formal editing by IOM.
This publication was issued without IOM Research Unit (RES) endorsement.

Layout: Amela TIGANJ
Required citation: Tropp, L. R. and L. Morhayim, 2022. Designing, Implementing, and Evaluating the Impact of Social Mixing Programmes: a Toolkit for
IOM and its Partners. International Organization for Migration (IOM), Vienna.

___________________________
ISBN 978-92-9268-688-8 (PDF)
IOM © 2022​...

Some rights reserved. This work is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 IGO License (CC BY-NCND 3.0 IGO).*For further specifications please see the Copyright and Terms of Use.

This publication should not be used, published or redistributed for purposes primarily intended for or directed towards commercial advantage ormonetary compensation, with the exception of educational purpose e.g.to be included in textbooks.

Permissions: Requests for commercial use or further rights and licensing should be submitted to publications@iom.int.
* https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/igo/legalcode​

PUB2022/194/R​

...

DESIGNING, IMPLEMENTING, AND
EVALUATING THE IMPACT OF
SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES:​A TOOLKIT FOR IOM AND ITS PARTNERS​

Linda R. Tropp, PhD
Liora Morhayim, MA

...

...

...

Foreword
For decades, IOM has run projects and implemented activities
to counter xenophobia, address biases, and promote morepositive and evidence-based narratives of migration andmigrant communities. In a world where we see increasingpolarization, both between and within communities, our workin this field is more important than ever. Investing in policies
and programmes that promote social cohesion is therefore
critical to support long-term stability and development. This isalso in line with the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly andRegular Migration under objectives 16 and 17, with the aim to“empower migrants and societies to realize full inclusion andsocial cohesion”.
In 2021, we launched the publication The Power of Contact
which highlighted the theoretical underpinnings of IOM’s social
mixing programming, provided empirical evidence for thevalue and effects of inter-group contact, and shared goodpractices and lessons learned from IOM’s global experiences.
This new Toolkit for Designing, Implementing, and Evaluating
Social Mixing Programmes builds on The Power of Contact,providing IOM and its partners with more detailed guidance
and tools for the implementation and, in particular, theevaluation of social mixing programmes.
At IOM, we recognize the importance of having a strong evidence base for our programming andactivities as we strive to be an organization that is constantly learning, applying the latest knowledge
and insights in our programmes, and contributing to the global knowledge base in the field of
migration and integration. This toolkit assists practitioners in using the latest knowledge in the field toenhance the design and implementation of social mixing activities and, equally as important, provides
tools and guidance for evaluating the impact of our activities. Using these tools, practitioners andresearchers can continue to build our knowledge and understanding of when, how, and to what
extent social mixing can be an effective tool to improve perceptions and attitudes across groups, andparticularly between migrant and host communities, to foster social cohesion. Already in missions
where the toolkit has been piloted, programmes have been adapted and refined based on theevidence collected, to enhance their impact and value.
The toolkit forms part of IOM’s Diversity, Inclusion, and Social Cohesion (DISC) Initiative, a global
programme for research, capacity-building and support to IOM’s Member States and relevant
partners in the areas of migrant integration, inclusion, and social cohesion.
I invite you all not only to read the toolkit but also to apply the knowledge and tools within your workso that we can all contribute to building our knowledge base and continuously improving our value
and impact for migrants and the communities we serve.
...

Ugochi Daniels
Deputy Director General Operations
International Organization for Migrationii

CONTENTS

FOREWORDii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS​iv

INTRODUCTIONv

1. THEORIES UNDERLYING SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES: SOCIAL COHESION AND
INTERGROUP CONTACT​

1

1.1. SOCIAL COHESION
1.2. INTERGROUP CONTACT THEORY AND RESEARCH
1.3. EXAMPLES OF IOM SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
2. DESIGNING AND IMPLEMENTING SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES​
2.1 PRINCIPLES FOR DESIGNING SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
2.2. RECRUITING PARTICIPANTS FOR SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
3. EVALUATING THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
3.1. BASIC CONSIDERATIONS FOR EVALUATING THE IMPACT OF PROGRAMMES
3.2. DESIGNING IMPACT EVALUATIONS OF SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
3.3. MODES OF SURVEY ADMINISTRATION

4
11
15
20
23
40
47
50
52
63
66

3.4. PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND DATA ORGANIZATION
4. MEASURING THE EFFECTS OF SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
4.1. CORE OUTCOMES OF INTEREST FOR SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
4.2. ADDITIONAL CONCEPTS TO AID INTERPRETATION OF THE EFFECTS OF SOCIAL MIXINGPROGRAMMES
4.3. ADDITIONAL CONCEPTS RELEVANT TO SOCIETAL INSTABILITY
4.4. ADDITIONAL CONCEPTS RELEVANT TO CONTEXTS OF CIVIL CONFLICT
4.5. ADDITIONAL CONCEPTS FOR RELATIONS BETWEEN MIGRANT AND RECEIVINGCOMMUNITIESCONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY​

iii​

72
76
82
87
90
94
101
104

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We wish to acknowledge and express our appreciation to all IOM staff who have worked with
us in developing and refining survey items included in this toolkit, and especially those
focused on Labour Mobility and Social Inclusion (LMI) at the IOM Regional Office for SouthEastern Europe, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia (situated in Vienna, Austria), IOM's Global
Migration Data Analysis Centre (GMDAC), IOM Headquarters and IOM’s Diversity, Inclusion,and Social Cohesion Initiative (DISC Initiative​​) and IOM offices and local organizations working
on social mixing programmes in several countries (including in Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Ecuador, Türkiye, and Tunisia).

Twenty young persons, half IDPs and half local community members, participated in a painting training
followed by an opportunity to showcase their skills by painting murals in Malkohi, Nigeria. © IOM
2021/Natalie OREN.​​iv

Introduction​
Rising levels of xenophobia globally and in “migration hotspots” have the potential to createsocial instability, growing divisions, and, in the worst cases, violence. In such cases, investing inpolicies and programmes aimed at promoting social cohesion between migrants and hostcommunities is critical to supporting long-term stability and development. Facilitating
meaningful social interaction of people of different backgrounds is thus an increasingly
important tenet of mainstream programming and policies aimed at promoting migrant
inclusion and broader social cohesion at the local, national and even global levels. The
International Organization for Migration (IOM) implements a variety of projects and activities
around the world designed to promote social cohesion through intergroup contact that bring
together participants from different ethnic groups or migrant and host communities. Throughthis work, IOM engages with various target groups in different contexts.
In 2021, IOM launched the publication The Power of Contact​ which highlighted thetheoretical underpinnings of IOM’s social mixing programming, provided empirical evidence
for the value and effects of intergroup contact, and shared good practices and lessons learned
from IOM’s global experiences. This toolkit serves as a companion guide to The Power ofContact.
Are you not familiar with the power of contact? Watch the video below...

Or scan the QR code

Access The Power of Contact​​directly.​​

...

...

v​

Why use this Toolkit
The toolkit provides project developers, ​managers and implementers with more detailed
guidance about how to design, implement and evaluate the impact of social mixing
activities by walking readers through the steps involved in each of these processes. Poolinginsights gained from academic research and field experiences, it aims to provide IOM staff
and partners with practical suggestions for developing impactful programmes andenhancing the effectiveness of existing programmes. Hence, this toolkit covers theory andresearch on social cohesion and intergroup contact and explains how this research andacademic knowledge can inform and be applied within IOM’s social mixing programmes.
The toolkit also covers how to evaluate the impact of activities on participants’ perceptions
and attitudes toward other groups, including specific instructions on how to design andconduct impact evaluations, concrete concepts to be measured and examples of survey
questions to be used to measure these concepts. Impact evaluations can demonstrate thestrengths of existing programmes as well as identify areas that might benefit from further
refinement.
​ his toolkit will provide its readers with insights and concrete steps on scientific andTevidence-based approaches to migrant inclusion and social cohesion through social mixing
programmes. It also allows readers to learn from their programming and develop more
impactful social cohesion activities, to contribute to academic knowledge and policy
development on intergroup contact.
Whether you have just begun learning about social mixing programmes or you haveconsiderable experience with them, it is our hope that this toolkit will help to support yourefforts in designing, implementing, and evaluating the impact of social mixing
programmes.​

Syrian refugees join alongside host community members in a tour, organized by IOM at one of the
Ottoman museums in Istanbul. © IOM 2016/Muse MOHAMMED.​How this Toolkit is structured
CHAPTER I...

Chapter One provides an overview of theories underlying
social mixing programmes, including definitions of social
cohesion and key principles from research on intergroupcontact.

CHAPTER II...

Chapter Two describes how key contact principles can beused in practice when designing and implementing social
mixing programmes. ​CHAPTER III...

Chapter Three outlines crucial factors to consider whenevaluating the impact of social mixing programmes, alongwith strategies for project management when conducting
impact evaluations of social mixing programmes.
​...

CHAPTER IV
Lastly, Chapter Four focuses on how to assess desired
outcomes of social mixing programmes, including
descriptions of key concepts and sample survey items.

vii

How to use the Toolkit?
It is recommended that you read through the IOM Toolkit sequentially to gain a goodunderstanding of the overall concepts, and to refer to specific sections within the chapters as
the need arises. Next to the main text, the IOM Toolkit has graphically marked key pieces of
information that you can refer to, as you read through.

...

Blue text boxes highlight key information or provide additional
information to complement the ideas and content in the main body ofthe text.

...

Yellow text boxes provide good practices and tips that relate to thediscussion in the main body of the text.

...

​ reen text boxes contain resources pertaining to the specific topicG
mentioned above the box.

...

Red text boxes provide information on survey items for measuring theeffects of social mixing programmes presented in Chapter four.

viii

Links to Toolkit chapters
INTRODUCTION
1. THEORIES UNDERLYING SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES: SOCIAL COHESION AND 14
INTERGROUP CONTACT
1.1. SOCIAL COHESION
1.2. INTERGROUP CONTACT THEORY AND RESEARCH
1.3. EXAMPLES OF IOM SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
2. DESIGNING AND IMPLEMENTING SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
2.1 PRINCIPLES FOR DESIGNING SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
2.2. RECRUITING PARTICIPANTS FOR SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
3. EVALUATING THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
3.1. BASIC CONSIDERATIONS FOR EVALUATING THE IMPACT OF PROGRAMMES
3.2. DESIGNING IMPACT EVALUATIONS OF SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
3.3. MODES OF SURVEY ADMINISTRATION
3.4. PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND DATA ORGANIZATION
4. MEASURING THE EFFECTS OF SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
4.1. CORE OUTCOMES OF INTEREST FOR SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
4.2. ADDITIONAL CONCEPTS TO AID INTERPRETATION OF THE EFFECTS OF SOCIAL
MIXING PROGRAMMES
4.3. ADDITIONAL CONCEPTS RELEVANT TO SOCIETAL INSTABILITY
4.4. ADDITIONAL CONCEPTS RELEVANT TO CONTEXTS OF CIVIL CONFLICT
4.5. ADDITIONAL CONCEPTS FOR RELATIONS BETWEEN MIGRANT AND RECEIVINGCOMMUNITIESCONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY

CHAPTER I
THEORIES UNDERLYING SOCIAL
MIXING PROGRAMMES: SOCIALCOHESION AND INTERGROUPCONTACT
Chapter 1 provides an overview of theories
underlying social mixing programmes, including
definitions of social cohesion and key principles
from research on intergroup contact.

© IOM 2016/Muse MOHAMMED.

...

1.
​ HEORIES UNDERLYINGT
SOCIAL MIXINGPROGRAMMES: SOCIALCOHESION AND
INTERGROUP CONTACT

1.1. SOCIAL COHESION​
1.2. INTERGROUP CONTACT THEORY AND RESEARCH
1.3. EXAMPLES OF IOM SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES

2

Literature shows that there is a fragmented view of whatsocial cohesion is. It is best defined by the absence of
conflict or crime, a characteristic of society, a desire foraffiliation, a group property, a degree of stability, thestrength of connections, as a transient state/process,and the same as good relationships or a national
identity (which might not be true in current multiculturalsocieties).
Fonseca et al., 2019

© Elsa Martino/creative commons.

3

1.1. SOCIAL COHESION
What is social cohesion?​
Defining “social cohesion” is challenging because there is no commonly accepted definition
and it is often confused with terms such as assimilation, cultural diversity, or multiculturalism.
For this context, we are following the definition of IOM, which states that ​''while there is no
one universal definition, social cohesion is usually associated with such notions as ‘solidarity’,‘togetherness’, ‘tolerance’ and ‘harmonious co‐existence’ “ (IOM, 2019a)​.
​The concept describes the bonds that tie a community together through trust and common
norms, and it is not exclusively associated with contexts of migration. It refers to the absenceof fractures or divisions within a society or community and the ability to manage such
divisions.​

So, what characterizes a cohesive society?
​ irst, a cohesive society creates a sense of belonging for all communities and promotes trustF
between them.​ Second, it values the diversity of people’s different backgrounds andcircumstances. Third, it fights exclusion and marginalization and promotes positive
relationships between people from different backgrounds. ​Finally, a cohesive society offers its
members the opportunity for upward mobility and provides persons from different
backgrounds similar life opportunities (IOM, 2022).
​ onseca et al. (2019) analysed different perspectives and studies on social cohesion andFsuggested that three perspectives are consistently used to study social cohesion: theindividual level, the community level, and the institutional level.

...

Fonseca et al. (2019) conclude that"cohesion happens in the intersection of
the three mentioned levels, and therefore
all three levels need to be considered tounderstand social cohesion."
For example, a migrant might have themotivation to participate and perform in
the host society, but if the formal
structure of the country does not allow
foreigners to act or organize themselves,then social cohesion is hampered.​This means that, to participate in society, individuals need​:
Favourable communities (climate with compatible sets of norms and values);
Institutions (formal structures, norms and values) that do not limit the individual's actions
and choices.
4

The following illustration shows the connections and interdependencies between theindividual, the community and institutions that need to be taken into account to better
comprehend social cohesion.

Framework to characterize social cohesion...

Source: IOM 2022 after Fonseca et. al., 2019.

...

If you want to learn more about social cohesion and its
relations to the concept of integration and social inclusion,
explore the links below:​
EMM 2.0 Handbook: Integration and Social Cohesion
World Migration Report 2020: Chapter 6: Migration, Inclusion andSocial Cohesion: Challenges, Recent Developments andOpportunities​​
Global Compact thematic paper: Integration and Social
Cohesion: Key Elements for Reaping the Benefits of Migration​​5

Linkages to the Global Compact for Migration and 2030 Agenda
The importance of social cohesion has been increasingly recognized by governments andother relevant stakeholders and is directly referred to in the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly,
and Regular Migration and implicitly mentioned in the 2030 Agenda in several of the
Sustainable Development Goals (SDG):
Which objective refers to social cohesion in the Global Compact for Migration?
Objective 16: Empower migrants and societies to realize full inclusion and social cohesion.
...

Under this Objective, countries are encouraged to commit tofostering inclusive and cohesive societies by empowering
migrants to become active members of society andpromoting the reciprocal engagement of receiving
communities and migrants in the exercise of their rights andobligations towards one another.​

In which SDG is social cohesion implicitly mentioned?
...

Find more information on Social Cohesion in the SDGs and the Global Compact for
Migration​under the provided Links.​​

6

Indicators of social cohesion
There is no universal set of standard indicators to measure social cohesion. This area has
evolved with various stakeholders developing indicators and measures over the past decades.
For the more incipient stages of defining and measuring social cohesion, we have seen a lot of
overlap with general indicators for integration such as language acquisition, inclusion in thelabour market, access to and availability of employment/training and social benefits, housing
and education, level of participation in social, cultural and political life or level of
discriminatory and xenophobic attitudes (Jensen, 2010). Over the last couple of years, several
ways of measuring social cohesion have surfaced, paving the way for a more nuanced
approach. We will look at three of these approaches below.

What indicators to use?

This depends mainly on the context andwhat is of particular interest to measure,whether it is access to services, levels oftrust between groups, or amount ofintergroup cooperation.

...

In most circumstances, a mix of more
traditional inclusion indicators related toaccess to employment and education, andspecific indicators of social cohesion(social relations, level of connectedness,participation in civic life) are used.​​...

The Survey Bank on Migrant Integration and Social Cohesion
developed by IOM is a good source of indicators that can be used
to measure the results and impact of social cohesion programmes.
Another useful source is the IOM / IPL Migrant Integration Index,
which is a multidimensional measurement tool on migrant
integration. See the links below:
IOM Survey Bank on Migrant Integration and Social Cohesion​​I​OM / IPL Migrant Integration Index (only accessible with an IOM
account)​

7

Sample approaches to measurement of social cohesion
The Nine Dimensions of Social Cohesion
In 2012, the Bertelsmann Foundation developed a methodology to measure social cohesion inany place and at any given time based on their specific definition of social cohesion. According
to this definition, a “cohesive society is characterized by resilient social relations, a positive
emotional connectedness between its members and the community, and a pronounced focus
on the common good.” These three aspects are divided into three sub-components, creating
the Nine Dimensions of social cohesion, which you can see in the graphic below (Dragolov etal., 2013).
Areas and dimensions of social cohesion​...

​Source: Bertelsmann Stiftung​​, 2018.

8

The Triad of Social Inclusion
The German Development Institute has proposed a definition that conceptualizes social
cohesion as follows: Social cohesion refers to the vertical and horizontal relations among
members of society and the state that hold society together. Social cohesion is characterized
by attitudes and behavioural manifestations that include an inclusive identity, trust andcooperation for the common good.
The concept focuses on the interaction of three dimensions:
Inclusive identity, which goes beyond personal identities and focuses on social identities
such as membership or one’s sense of belonging to different social groups;
Trust, which includes trust in specific groups, in institutions or general trust in the society;
Focus on the common good, meaning interests that transcend those of the individuals
involved and a high level of solidarity based on willful rather than incentivized cooperation(Leininger et al., 2021).
The Scanlon-Monash Index
The Scanlon Index was developed for the Australian government but has been used indifferent contexts around the world. It creates rankings according to five key indicators ofsocial cohesion: belonging, worth, social justice, participation, and acceptance.
Belonging focuses on pride in the Australian way of life and culture, a sense of belonging
and the importance of maintaining the Australian way of life and culture;
Worth focuses on satisfaction with the present financial situation and an indication ofhappiness over the past year;
Social justice focuses on views of the adequacy of financial support for people with low
incomes, the gap between high and low incomes, and the level of trust in the AustralianGovernment, among other indicators;​
Participation focuses on the level of civic engagement, such as whether the respondents
voted in an election, signed a petition, attended a protest, or contacted a member ofParliament, among other indicators;​
Acceptance focuses on the level of rejection of outside groups, indicated by negative viewsof immigration from different countries, reported experience of discrimination in the last
12 months, disagreement with government support for ethnic minorities, or that life in thenext three or four years will be worse​(Markus, 2021).
Data using this index has been collected regularly over decades, allowing for broad analysis.​9

IOM and social cohesion programming
Considering that social cohesion is a cross-cutting and multi-sectoral issue, IOM's
programming related to social cohesion​ is equally broad and implemented under multiple
departments and in various contexts.
The two main IOM departments working on social cohesion explicitly are:
The Department of Peace and Development Coordination and specifically within theTransition and Recovery Division and;The Department of Programme Support and Migration Management, specifically within the
Labour Mobility and Social Inclusion Division and within the Migration Health Division, theMental Health, Psychosocial Response and Intercultural Communication Unit.
Within the Transition and Recovery Division, IOM is implementing programmes in crisis, postcrisis, transitional, or fragile contexts related to both natural and human-made crises,
including community engagement to improve inclusive participation and social cohesion,community-based planning and community stabilization interventions.

...

​In these contexts, IOM’s Community Stabilization Initiatives work acrossmultiple sectors to address the numerous and complex drivers of
instability and insecurity, focusing on using community engagement toimprove inclusive participation and social cohesion. Whether throughcommunity-based public works or cooperative entrepreneurship,
effective community stabilization interventions try to factor in how
activities contribute to social relations, looking at how interventions canbe designed to promote better social relations as well as the risks ofexacerbating any existing divisions.

Within the Labour Mobility and Social Inclusion Division, IOM implements a wide range ofservices and interventions which support newcomers in all stages of the migration continuum
while sensitizing host communities to the benefits of diverse societies. The Division’s focus
includes social mixing interventions, inclusion of minority groups, combating xenophobia,
misinformation and hate speech, and provision of tailored pre- and post-arrival orientation.
​ ithin the Mental Health, Psychosocial Response and Intercultural Communication Unit, IOM
W
provides direct Mental Health and Psychosocial Support (MHPSS) to migrants, emergencyaffected and host communities using a community-based approach. The unit’s programmes
include community stabilization, social cohesion and peace building activities which focus on(re) establishing social support structures, trust and social networks and improve thepsychosocial well-being at individual and community level through culturally appropriate
interventions. In general, social cohesion activities in IOM come in many different forms but
are based on the common goal of bringing people together to promote positive social
relations, connectedness and focus on the common good.

10

1.2. INTERGROUP CONTACT THEORY AND RESEARCH
What is intergroup contact?​I​ntergroup contact refers to situations​when people from different social groups — such as
racial, ethnic, religious, and/or national groups — interact with each other.
Since the 1940s, intergroup contact has been proposed as a strategy to reduce prejudice andimprove attitudes and relations between groups. Much of IOM’s programming around social
mixing and social cohesion is based on the principles of intergroup contact theory andresearch. With its scholarship and evidence-base rooted in the field of social psychology,intergroup contact can be distinguished from other prejudice-reduction approaches, such as
trainings designed to build empathy or intercultural awareness.
Typically, these other approaches lack active engagement between people from different
groups and may only focus on fostering change among members of one community inrelation to another — such as promoting host society members’ empathy toward migrants
and greater awareness of migrants’ cultural practices.

What does the scientific evidence say about the effects of intergroupcontact?
Decades of rigorous research, including hundreds of studies from dozens of countries,
indicate that greater intergroup contact typically yields reductions in prejudice between
groups (Pettigrew and Tropp, 2011). Importantly, this body of research shows that contact
between individual members of different groups not only improves their attitudes toward one
another, but each person’s more positive attitudes toward the other also generalize into morepositive attitudes toward the other’s group as a whole.
The effects of intergroup contact can also be farther-reaching. For instance, the more people
become aware that other members of their own groups have friendly contact with individuals
from other groups, the more likely they are to develop positive attitudes toward those othergroups as well. ​These are some key reasons why social mixing programmes are often used toreduce prejudice between groups: encounters between people from different groups not only
serve to improve intergroup attitudes among those who interact with each other, but they canalso serve to help others in their communities see relations between the groups in a morepositive light.
Beyond reducing prejudice, newer generations of research also show that greater contact
between groups can reduce feelings of threat and anxiety associated with group differences,along with building empathy and trust between members of different groups. More broadly,
greater intergroup contact also tends to be associated with greater interest in the lived
experiences of people from other groups, along with greater concern for their welfare andgreater willingness to work toward peaceful solutions to conflicts.

11Additional insights about intergroup contact...

Watch the video where Professor Linda R. Tropp
talks about research on intergroup contact, andhow people from different groups may experience
contact with each other.

Reflection: What is a key message that stays with you after watching the video?
Print this page, or use your own paper and pen​to write down your reflections.​

Answer here12Principles for the practical application of intergroup contact theory andresearch​
For such encouraging contact outcomes to emerge, we need to pay careful attention to
how intergroup contact is structured during social mixing programmes. Extensive research
indicates that contact between groups should follow several key principles to achieve its
desired effects.

​Repeated and sustain​ed contact between groups over time
Instead of having contact programmes last only one day, activities should be planned
so that people from different groups have repeated and sustained opportunities tointeract with one another. The more people from different groups interact with eachother, the deeper their relationships can grow. Thus, repeated contact experiences overtime are very important for changing attitudes and building feelings of friendship andtrust that will last beyond the programmed activities.​

Equal status during contact
Although there may be differences in power or status between groups outside of thecontact programme, people from different groups should be treated and regarded as
equals when they interact with each other. For example, members of different groups
should have equal opportunities to participate, as well as equal opportunities tocontribute ideas and make decisions about programme activities. It is especially
important to guard against assigning members of one group to be “helpers” andmembers of another group to be “recipients” of help; instead, it is preferable to plan
activities where members of each group have something to contribute to theprogramme's activities and success.

Active engagement toward common goals
Contact programmes should be structured so that members of both groups must
actively engage with each other during the programme’s activities in order to meetcommon goals. Activities selected for contact programmes should be appealing tomembers of each group and require active participation — where they must work
together to create something new and interesting — as compared to activities thatwould require less active forms of participation. Ideally, people from different groups
would need to interact with one another, and rely on each other, in order to achieve
their shared goals.​13Intergroup cooperation​It is also important for members of different groups to engage with each other in waysthat are collaborative rather than competitive. Programme activities should bedesigned to build cooperation and teamwork across group lines, in order to minimize
the tendency for people from different groups to see each other in “us versus them”
terms. Instead, through cooperative programme activities, people from different
groups can learn to see each other and work together as part of the same team.

Support from community leaders and institutional authorities
The interactive, equal status, and collaborative contact activities described above areespecially likely to improve attitudes between groups when community leaders andinstitutional authorities explicitly support this type of contact. The more that support
for intergroup contact is expressed by community leaders and institutional authorities,
the more people from different groups will see their participation in contact
programmes as accepted, and the less concerned they will be about being rejected or
excluded by their own group for engaging in intergroup contact. By endorsing thesekinds of contact programmes, community leaders and institutional authorities canfacilitate individuals’ participation and strengthen relationships across group lines.

​The project ''Painting dreams against the walls'' aims to strengthen social cohesion in Bosnia andHerzegovina through the participatory creation of the street art. IOM 2022/IOM BiH.

14

1. 3. EXAMPLES OF IOM SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
To illustrate, we present some examples of social mixing programmes implemented by IOM
that incorporate principles of intergroup contact in practice.​

Example 1: IOM Peru – The Ball Has No Flags initiative
The Ball Has No Flags initiative is part of the Barrio Seguro programme sponsored by Ministryof the Interior, to reduce violence and promote safety in Peruvian neighbourhoods. Alongsideother activities, this initiative leverages Latin America’s most popular sport — football — tofacilitate contact between local Peruvian youth and Venezuelan migrant youth. Due to a recent
surge in migration, Perú ​has become one of the highest receiving countries of Venezuelan
migrants, and host to the largest population of Venezuelan asylum seekers worldwide (USAID,
2022).
​ n evaluation study conducted by IOM Peru is a testament to the effectiveness of this socialAmixing programme. Over 80 per cent of the youth participants indicated that they:“have more friends from other countries” and “are able to connect with boys and girls fromother countries”​ s a result of participating in The Ball Has No Flags initiative. Additional results from theaevaluation showed that youth participants reported improved cooperation skills andstrengthened certain values such as resilience, integration, and community cohesion.​​

IOM and UNHCR launch “The Ball Has No Flags Initiative'' in Peru. © IOM/UNHCR 2019/Karla
CERVANTES.

15

The Ball Has No Flags initiative embodies many key principles ofintergroup contact:▢ Creating mixed teams
By creating teams with comparable numbers of Peruvian and Venezuelan youth, andrequiring youth to attend practice and games with their fellow team members on aregular basis, this programme encourages repeated interactions to sustain contact
between groups over time.
▢ ​Equal status
All team members, whether Venezuelan or Peruvian, have equal status during contact,as is usual in any type of team sport.
▢ Active engagement toward common goal
As Peruvian and Venezuelan youth play together on the same team with the goal of
winning football games​, as well as cheering on their team when not playing on the field,
they enact active engagement toward common goals under conditions of intergroupcoo​peration.​▢ Support from community leaders
Through support from Peruvian Ministry of the Interior, The Ball Has No Flags initiative
enjoys support from community leaders and institutional authorities.
© IOM/UNHCR 2019/KarlaCERVANTES

16

Example 2: IOM Austria CulTrain – Cultural Orientation Trainings for Young
Refugees
As part of a collaboration between IOM Austria and local Austrian youth organizations such asYoung Caritas, Austrian Alpine Climbing Youth Association, and provincial scouts’ associations,intergroup contact activities were designed to bring together local Austrian youth and migrant
youth aged 14–27 who recently arrived in Austria.
These organizations had various reasons for participating: to raise youth awareness of thesituation of migrants in Austria, to provide post-arrival orientation trainings to recent
migrants, to help local youth organizations expand their membership to include young
migrants, and to build trust between Austrian and migrant youth. As part of this programme,
Austrian and migrant youth did various activities together such as pantomime, creating
sculptures and quizzes with drawings.

IOM Project CulTrain. © Nick MANGAFAS.

17

One specific activity involved a treasure hunt throughout the city of Vienna where local youth
and migrant youth were assigned on teams together; over the course of the activity, eachteam had to answer a series of trivia questions, to take steps toward the goal of finding thetreasure.​

This activity exemplifies key contact principles in the following ways:▢ Equal status between groups​
There were fairly equal numbers of local youth and migrant youth on each team, andtrivia questions were intentionally designed to assess local Austrian knowledge, andknowledge relevant to living in Syrian Arab Republic and Afghanistan, thereby
establishing equal status between groups during contact.
▢ Intergroup cooperation
Austrian, Syrian, and Afghan members of each team collaborated to contribute answers
to trivia questions that would bring them closer to finding the treasure, illustrating bothintergroup cooperation and active engagement toward common goals.
▢ Support from local institutions​
The project was co-financed by the Austrian Federal Ministry for Europe, Integration andForeign Affairs. Moreover, the local youth association, Young Caritas, is funded by local
authorities which also implies institutional support from local authorities.

Project CulTrain. © IOM Austria.

18

Example 3: IOM South Sudan – Enhancing trust between women groups from
IDP sites and host communities
IOM has been implementing an MHPSS programme in South Sudan since 2014. Following theoutbreak of conflict and violence in 2013, millions of people were displaced internally and toneighbouring countries. In Upper Nile State, people have taken refuge in the Malakal United
Nations Protection of Civilian (PoC) Site. Until today, tensions unfold between members of theethnic group of Shilluk, who mainly reside in the PoC and the Padang Dinka, the main
population group of the neigbouring town Malakal. Insecurity, issues over housing, land andproperty, unresolved grievances and lack of basic services hinder the Shilluk population toleave the PoC to return to Malakal town.
IOM’s community-based MHPSS programme has established Recreational and Counselling
Centres in both locations offering a wide range of activities including, counselling, support
groups, creative and cultural activities, sports and play, and informal learning activities.
Contacts between both communities were arranged whenever the security situation in thelocation and level of trust between both groups allowed it.​​

The activity exemplifies key contact principles in the following ways:​▢ Support from local authorities and institutions
Before the encounters, representatives of both groups were trained on small-scale
conflict transformation skills and on the role of past grievances and emotions in ongoing
relations between the groups.
▢ Equal opportunities to participate
People from both communities were then invited to regular encounters in spaces
accessible to each group, and where each group could feel safe.
▢ Intergroup cooperation
During these encounters people from different communities engaged in recreational
activities with each other.

19​South Sudan © IOM 2020/ Angela WELLS.

CHAPTER II
DESIGNING AND
IMPLEMENTING SOCIAL
MIXING PROGRAMMESThe aim of Chapter 2 is to help IOM and its
partners envision how key contact principles
may be implemented as part of their own
social mixing programmes, and how toaddress some of the challenges that may
emerge when implementing social mixing
programmes across a range of contexts.

@ IOM, 2010​​

II​​ ESIGNING AND
D
IMPLEMENTING SOCIAL
MIXING PROGRAMMES

2.1. PRINCIPLES FOR DESIGNING SOCIAL MIXINGPROGRAMMES
2.2. RECRUITING PARTICIPANTS FOR SOCIAL MIXINGPROGRAMMES

21

...

So, what do we talk about in CHAPTER II?
Why don't you go ahead and listen to 71 secondsof the AUDIO Introduction Click HERE​​

22​2.1. PRINCIPLES FOR DESIGNING SOCI​AL MIXING PROGRAMMESIn this section, we review principles initially highlighted in Chapter 1 and offer
recommendations for how these may be used to design social mixing programmes.

Repeated and sustained contact between groups over time
It takes time and consistent effort for people from different groups to get to know one
another and build a sense of connection and trust. One meeting between members ofdifferent groups will typically not be enough to create the kinds of connections from which
positive intergroup attitudes and trust can grow.​ We therefore recommend that social mixing
programmes give people from different groups repeated opportunities for contact with eachother, to cultivate deeper connections and feelings of trust across groups that will be more
likely to last over time.​​Especially in fragile, post-conflict settings, the frequency and intensity of social mixing activities
may vary depending on the readiness of different groups to interact with each other. In more
long-term programmes, groups may need to start building trust with"lighter" levels of
engagement, such as recreational activities that involve both groups and encourage them tocooperate with each other. With time, and as more trust is established, programmes canevolve to include deeper levels of engagement between groups. Continuous programmes
therefore should have potential sequences of programming in mind.
Recommended​​...

Social mixing programmes where the same people from different groups
have repeated opportunities to interact with each other over time – suchas over many days, weeks, or even over many months.​

Not Recommended​​...

Social mixing programmes where people from different groups only meeteach other once or only interact during a one-day activity.​​...

You can find detailed information on MHPSS programing in:
IOMs Manual on Community-Based Mental Health andPsychosocial Support in Emergencies and Displacement

23

There are several strategies implementing partners can use to encourage
participation in social mixing programmes over the long term:

Set the expectation for continued participation from the beginning of the
programmeI​nform participants of social mixing programmes that they are expected to attend andengage with others on a regular and consistent basis. Consider taking attendance at thestart of each programme meeting, to remind participants of the expectation for regularparticipation.​

Encourage participants to learn about and be accountable for each other
Begin programmes with “ice breakers” to help participants learn each other’s names andshare “fun facts” about themselves with others. Remind programme participants thatthey will be engaging with the same people during future programme meetings, tomotivate them to remember their names and fun facts. Assign participants to work
collaboratively in pairs or in small groups so that they will feel more accountable to eachother as their project progresses.

Foster participation throughout the programme using various forms of
encouragement
Offer regular praise for people’s presence and active engagement in programme
activities. Consider offering small prizes at the end of the programme as a way toexpress appreciation for regular participation. Provide opportunities for programmeparticipants to showcase the work they have done in collaboration with others, throughpresentations or exhibitions to which their families and other members of the larger
community will be invited.

24​Common Barriers:
What if the groups we seek to bring together for social mixing programmes live in differentne​ighbourhoods?
Oftentimes, the greatest need for social mixing programmes emerges in spaces where
social groups have little prior interaction with each other.​​...

Seek to engage people in community spaces where they can feel safe
and welcome such as in parks, community centres, and schools intheir respective neighbourhoods.​

Consider holding programme activities in locations that areaccessible to members of both groups, or alternate meeting locations
across the different neighbourhoods where participating groups
reside.​...

...

When necessary, provide transportation options, carpools, orvouchers to make it possible for participants from different groups
to attend programme activities together on a regular basis.​​© IOM 2016/Muse MOHAMMED​

25

Equal status during contact
Oftentimes, people come to social mixing programmes as representatives of groups that holddifferent positions of power in society, due to a variety of reasons (for example, racial or
ethnic background, citizenship or migration status, religious affiliation, or economic standing).
Given these power differences in the larger society, we must do what we can to equalize thestatus of different groups within social mixing programmes so that, regardless of theirbackground, all participants can feel equally included and respected as they take part inprogramme activities.​...

© Image by upklyak on Freepik...

Recommended​
Activities and norms that encourage members of different groups to work
together collaboratively and in cooperation during social mixing
programmes.​...

Not Recommended​​ rogramme activities that amplify status differences between groups inP
the larger society, or that consist of charity from one group to another.​26

Here are some strategies implementers can use to equalize the status ofdifferent groups within the context of social mixing programmes:

Set ground rules for programme participation and reinforce through word andaction that all participants are to be included and respected throughout
programme activities
Regardless of background, all programme participants should feel respected andincluded during programme activities. Approximately equal numbers of people fromeach group should be included as programme participants and all should feel a sense ofownership and that they have something valuable to contribute. Participants from thedifferent groups should also be equally involved in decision-making for programme
activities, as well as in the collaborative activities that take place throughout the
programme.

Ensure that community leaders and representatives from each group are involvedin programme planning and facilitation
Take efforts to ensure that members of each community contribute their voice toprogramme design and implementation. Identify skilled facilitators who represent thedifferent groups to be included in the programme, and who can effectively reinforce
norms of inclusion, respect, and equal participation for all during programme activities.

Avoid assigning participants from different groups to roles that will have different
levels of power, status, or influence during the programme
Rather than reinforce existing status or power differences in the larger society, efforts
should be made to diminish their relevance during programme activities. People fromeach group should be able to contribute meaningfully to programme activities in someway. Facilitators should encourage programme participants to recognize that people
from different groups can both give to each other and learn from each other.

27

Common Barriers
What can we do if people from participating groups differ in access to economic
resources?
...

Provide all necessary supplies and materials for programme activities
so that all participants will be able to participate fully without needing
to contribute their own personal resources.​...

Importantly, programme activities should not be framed in terms ofcharity or gifts from one community to another.​​ Even if wellintentioned, this approach might inadvertently create an unequal
relationship between groups, whereby the more one group offers
what they have to give, the more the other group ends up feeling put
in the position of receiving others’ charity.​

The Intercultural School in a Multicultural Society” brings together Polish and migrant teachers andstudents through activities that foster the understanding of and respect for different cultural groups. ©
IOM​2013/IOM Poland

28

Active engagement toward common goals
When people from different groups first come together, they may be cautious about getting toknow each other. Thus, social mixing programmes can be designed in ways that ensure
members of different groups actually engage with each other during programme activities.
One useful strategy is establishing a common goal that reflects the interests of the different
groups, and that would require the groups to engage with each other in order to achieve it.
​ ften the common goal changes over time for example when social mixing programmes leadO
to joint initiative such as small-scale income-generating projects.
...

© Image by upklyak on Freepik...

Recommended​
Programme activities that require active participation toward common
goals, such as those where members of different groups engage witheach other to make music, perform a play, create art, build aplayground, or prepare food for a festival.​...

Not Recommended​
Programme activities that do not require active participation toward
common goals, such as those where members of different groups simply
attend a musical concert or play, visit an art exhibition or playground, or
enjoy food at a festival.​​29Here are some strategies that programme organizers might use to equalize
the status of different groups within the context of social mixing
programmes:

Provide clear instructions so that programme participants know what to expect
People from different groups who do not already know each other may be hesitant toengage with each other or work together unless they are explicitly told to do so. Provide
participants with clear instructions about the activities they will engage in and how they
will be expected to work together in order to reduce any initial feelings of anxiety or
discomfort.

Focus programme activities around participants’ interests and hobbies, toencourage active engagement
Social mixing programmes can be targeted toward people from different groups whoshare interests in a variety of activities such as sports, cooking, music, theater, or otherart forms. By providing participants with opportunities to pursue their interests duringsocial mixing programmes​, participants may become more willing to engage with people
from different groups while actively participating in programme activities.

Consider designing social mixing activities around existing community needs
People from different groups may be more willing to participate in social mixing
programmes​ if they directly address existing community needs — for example, building
community gardens or new playgrounds, renovating historic buildings, or painting
murals to beautify public spaces. The more social mixing programmes​ addresscommunity needs directly, the more likely diverse groups of people living in thosecommunities will see benefits associated with participating in these programmes​.
Activities around community needs can also foster a sense of community belonging
while providing new resources from which all groups in the community can benefit.​

30

Common Barriers
What can we do if people from participating groups speak different languages?
...

Consider activities that can be completed with limited knowledge ofanother language, such as community gardening or mural painting.​​...

Provide interpreters and bilingual materials, as needed, and include
exercises that help people from the different groups to learn key
words and phrases in each other’s languages, and especiallyvocabulary relevant to the projects they will be working on together.​...

For example: for a painting project you might teach“paint brush” = “pincel.”​Click HERE​​for more examples:

Alternative communication and artistic workshops for migrant and host communities population at thecity of Guayaquil, Ecuador. © IOM 2021/IOM Ecuador.

31

Int​ergroup cooperation
Along with establishing common goals, we must also ensure that members of different groups
work together collaboratively and in cooperation with each other to achieve these goals inorder to yield positive outcomes from social mixing programmes. Different groups may
initially be inclined to compete with each other when they come into contact, as a reflection ofbroader social conflicts or competitive norms that may exist in the larger society. It istherefore important to structure programme activities and norms that explicitly encourage
cooperative relations between groups.
...

© Image by upklyak on Freepik...

Recommended​​ ctivities and norms that encourage members of different groups to workA
together collaboratively and in cooperation during social mixing
programmes.​...

Not Recommended​​ ctivities and norms that allow intergroup conflict and competition toA
thrive during social mixing programmes.​​32

Below are some guidelines that may be useful to encourage
cooperation across group lines during social mixing programmes:

Assign participants from different groups to mixed teams for programme
activities
Require people from different groups to collaborate on projects during social mixing
programmes, to minimize natural tendencies toward group segregation. Whether inpairs or in small groups, ensure that there are comparable numbers of people fromeach group in the team, so that representations of the different groups will be balanced.

Include team-building activities when people from different groups start to work
together
Focus on breaking down any barriers that may exist in mixed teams by having all
members of the team introduce themselves to each other. Use team-building strategies
to get people from different groups talking with each other and ready to work together— for example, by describing some things that they have in common, or choosing a
name for their team related to the project they will do together.

Have trained facilitators guide cross-group interaction
Especially in fragile, post-conflict settings or contexts in which tensions between groups
persist, it can be useful to have well-trained facilitators guide people from different
communities through activities that encourage cross-group interaction. Facilitators
should be trained in Psychological First Aid to know how to approach a person in
distress, and referrals should be available in case some programme participants need
psychosocial support after the intervention.

33

Common Barriers:
What can we do if there is initial hesitance about working together across group lines?
...

Before programme activities begin, consider handing out tickets(representing different numbers, or colours) when individual
participants enter the room; then, ask participants to sit at the tablewith others who share the same number or colour.​...

Alternatively, take a deck of playing cards to the meeting room where
activities will take place and hand a playing card to each participant
as they arrive; then, ask participants to sit at the table where
everyone has a card of the same suit or the same number (forexample, to create groups of four people, everyone with a “two” card
would sit at the same table). ​Using these types of strategies can help to make sure that people from different groups
disperse before the start of the programme, so that they actually engage with each otherduring programme activities.

Members of migrant, refugee and host communities participate in a basketball tournament organized
by IOMs Psychosocial Mobile teams in Nizip, Gaziantep. © IOM 2021/Nadine AL LAHHAM

34

Support from community leaders and institutional authorities
Explicit approval for social mixing activities from community leaders and institutional
authorities indicates a norm that supports having contact with members of other groups. The
more that people from different groups see their community’s leaders supporting intergroupcontact, the more willing they will be to participate in social mixing programmes.
Implementing partners and programme facilitators also play important roles in setting thenorms for social mixing programmes and modelling the types of behaviours that people
should adopt when interacting with members of other groups.
...

© Image by upklyak on Freepik...

Recommended​
Having leaders from different groups indicate their support for social
mixing programmes, such as by signing a letter encouraging people intheir community to participate or offering supportive remarks at a public
event.​...

Not Recommended​
Having community leaders withhold their support for social mixing
programmes, or discouraging or critiquing community members who seek
to participate.​​35

Here are some strategies that implementing partners might use to foster
support for social mixing programmes through community leaders and localorganizations:

Invite community leaders and institutions to get involved​ rovide opportunities for community leaders and local organizations to show theirPsupport for the social mixing programmes. Invite them to cosponsor events and offer
opening remarks that speak to the value and importance of social mixing programmes
for their community.​Also, encourage community leaders and local organizations to postsigns in their offices and on bulletin boards in public areas to inform people about thesocial mixing programmes​​and their value.

Serve as models for positive cross-group relations, through words and actions
Ensure that local leaders and programme facilitators from different groups model thekinds of cooperative behaviour and collaboration they hope to observe among
participants during social mixing programmes. Examples may include sharing
responsibilities and speaking roles, as well as demonstrating comfort engaging witheach other and mutual support during programme​ activities. The more participants
observe such friendly, cooperative cross-group behaviour among community leadersand programme facilitators, the more they will see positive relations between groups aspart of the local norms, and the more likely they will be to behave accordingly.

​ he IOM project ''Community Stabilization and Early Recovery For At-Risk Communities in Bangui'' aims toTencourage peaceful co-habitation and dialogue in mixed communities in Bangui, Central African Republic,
through community reconstruction processes. © IOM 201536

Common Barriers:
What can we do if parents are still concerned about having their own children
participate in programme activities with youth from other groups?
...

Consider designing social mixing programmes​ around activities
that parents would see as a benefit to their children (for example,
developing skills in computer programming).​...

Provide parents with detailed information about programme ​goals
and activities and what kinds of supervision will occur during the
programme​, along with an opportunity to ask any questions they
may have, before asking them to provide consent for their own
children to participate.​...

Also, consider inviting prior youth participants and their parents to
speak at informational sessions about upcoming programmes, sothat parents who are new to the programme​ can gain reassuranceof the programme​’s value and benefits.​

Using street art to engage with migrants and community members in Agadez, the Niger. © IOM 2017/
Monica CHIRIAC.

37

A note about in-person versus virtual social mixing programmes
Bringing different communities together in the same physical space for social mixing
programmes is desirable, yet it may not always be feasible. In many contexts, legacies ofconflict or living in segregated communities can often make it difficult for people fromdifferent groups to come together safely within the same space. Requirements for social
distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic have also presented many challenges to in-person
programming.
In response, virtual programming has been developed to continue to provide opportunities
for people to connect across group lines. Media platforms that allow people to participate
together in real time — such as Zoom or social media platforms — have been particularly
useful for facilitating and sustaining contact between groups during these challenging times.
Conducted via computer or other electronic devices, social mixing programmes that occur
virtually can still take many forms, ranging from interactive workshops to collaborations on awide variety of projects.
Although in-person contact is still preferable, emerging research suggests that contact that
occurs in virtual settings can be very effective in developing positive attitudes and relations
between groups (White et al., 2022). Similar principles apply to both in-person and virtual
contact programming, such that both should provide repeated opportunities for interaction,
establish equal status between groups, encourage members of different groups to actively
engage with each other while working cooperatively toward common goals, and with support
from community leaders and local organizations.
At the earliest stages of contact, virtual contact may also be especially helpful for people toovercome initial feelings of anxiety about interacting with other groups, because it allows
them to engage in those interactions with some degree of distance.​

...

...

38

Despite many possible benefits associated with conducting social mixing programmes​
virtually, implementing partners should also be mindful that:
Reliable internet access and availability of required technology may not be available in allareas where members of the different groups reside.
It may be more challenging to keep programme participants actively engaged andcooperating with each other during social mixing programmes​, because of their distancefrom each other.
Along with hosting joint events in real time, social mixing programmes that occur virtuallyshould encourage participants to share their names, texts, and photos using ''chat''
functions, to enhance participants' feelings of being present with each other and to yielddesired broader changes in social cohesion outcomes​from the contact.

...

If you want to learn more about virtual social mixing programmes see for example:
Beyond direct contact: The theoretical and societal relevance of indirect contact for
improving intergroup relations (White et al., 2022);
When is computer-mediated intergroup contact most promising? Examining the effectof out-group members' anonymity on prejudice (Schumann et al., 2017);
Revisiting the contact hypothesis: Effects of different modes of computer-mediatedcommunication on intergroup relationships (Cao and Lin, 2017).
If you are looking for tips on how to design virtual sessions, you may refer to the following
links for examples:​Virtual Training: 29 Tips to Maximize Your Sessions
Awesome Event Icebreakers Attendees Will Enjoy​​
The Power of Digitalization in the Age of Physical Distancing (DISC Digest 4th Edition)​39

2.2. RECRUITING PARTICIPANTS FOR SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
Keeping in mind the challenges often associated with participation in social mixing programmes, we
encourage implementing project organizers to develop a strategy for outreach and recruitment thatwill help them to achieve their programmatic goals.
Given that progamme organizers may be working in varied and distinct contexts — ranging fromthose that integrate migrants in relatively peaceful and stable contexts, to those engaged incommunity stabilization efforts following violent civil conflict — they may find it useful to hold focus
groups with people from different groups within local communities, or to reach out to community
leaders. These steps can help them learn more about how members of different backgrounds viewand relate to one another prior to programme implementation, and what outcomes of social mixing
programmes would be most crucial and realistic to achieve.​ To ensure that power dynamics within
local communities do not shape the social mixing programmes, activities and participants should not
be chosen by community leaders only.
In the sections that follow, we offer some suggestions and points to consider when recruiting
participants for social mixing programmes and engaging in outreach across communities toencourage programme participation.

Specifying desired characteristics of programme participants
As a general principle, the more organizers think deeply about what they hope their social mixing
programmes will accomplish, and what outcomes they desire these programmesto have, the moreclearly they will be able to specify who they seek to recruit as programmeparticipants. Some more
specific points that organizers and implementing partners might attend to include:​
Demographic characteristics of participants from different groups;
Community roles and influence of participants from different groups;
Levels of prior cross-group interaction among participants from different groups .

40

Demographic characteristics of participants from different groups
Ideally, when recruiting people from different racial, ethnic, or religious groups for social
mixing programmes, they will be similar on other demographic characteristics (such asage, gender and economic status), so that the primary difference between participantsfrom these groups will be the relevant group membership. This will likely make it easier
to assess whether the programme is comparably influential for people from eachparticipating group or, alternatively, whether the programme is more effective for one
participating group than for the other.

Community roles and influence of participants from different groups
When possible, it can often be beneficial to recruit influential people from different
groups — such as trusted community leaders and other well-connected community
members — to support and/or take part in social mixing programmes.​ Positive changes
resulting from social mixing programmes ​among community leaders and influential
others can have broader ripple effects in their communities and entice more people toparticipate in future cross-group programming.

Levels of prior cross-group interaction among participants from different groups
Initially, we might think it would be best to bring together people from different groups
who already know each other, or like each other, in order to have a successful social
mixing programme. However, studies suggest that people are most likely to betransformed by social mixing programmes​ when they have limited prior interactions
with other groups. The logic here is that people with lots of prior social mixing
experience, or who already have highly positive attitudes toward other groups, have lessroom to grow and change through participating in a social mixing programme.

41

Engaging in outreach for programme participation​​

Gaining interest in social mixing programmes and achieving balanced participation acrossgroups can depend a lot on features of the local social, political, and economic context, as wellas on the needs, interests, and concerns of members of each community.
Organizers of social mixing programmes​ may also come to realize that different outreach andrecruitment strategies might ultimately be necessary to foster participation among membersof different groups.

Watch the video from above or scan the
QR code to see how a skating school
changed its marketing to reach out tothe immigrant community and how it
impacted enrollment.​​...

Follow this link​​to share your thoughts and feedback about the video.​​42

Implementing partners and programme organizers may consider a number of strategies toreach varied communities and encourage their participation in social mixing programmessuch as:​Seeking out partnerships with other organizations
Consider reaching out to other organizations who already work with the communities you
seek to serve and who understand their perspectives and experiences. These otherorganizations may have additional insights to offer regarding both challenges andopportunities related to participant recruitment and programme implementation. Along withenvisioning mutually beneficial forms of collaboration, you might ask them for advice orassistance regarding how to recruit programme participants, how to disseminate information
about your programme​, and whether planned activities related to your programme conflictwith other scheduled activities in the community.

Making programme activities relevant to community needs and goals
Consider conducting an initial needs assessment to understand the primary needs, interests,
and concerns of community members, as well as their long-standing norms and traditions.
Along with providing insights on these fronts, direct conversations with community members
may also help you to learn more about other potential barriers that might hinder
participation, as well as incentives that might encourage greater participation. Design
programme activities that speak directly to community members’ primary interests, so thatthey will be especially motivated to participate in the programme.

Emphasizing programme activities over social cohesion goals​ hen engaging in outreach about your programme, think about what would make people
Wfrom different communities motivated to participate. It is likely that people will be more
motivated to participate in programme​s that provide them with opportunities to develop
skills, enjoy leisure activities, and/or contribute to community goals more than they would be
motivated by simply getting to know people from other social groups. Even if yourorganization is sponsoring programmes​ to promote social mixing and social cohesion, you
may therefore consider emphasizing the activities in which programme participants canbecome involved more than your own organization’s social cohesion goals.​43

Publicizing programme activities using appropriate communication strategies and tools
Depending on the local context and characteristics of the people you most wish to reach,consider which communication strategies and tools would be the most effective (for example,
word of mouth, community meetings, announcements from community leaders, outreachthrough email). ​For some populations in some contexts, social media platforms (such as
Facebook or WhatsApp) can be effective tools for outreach, given their capacity to share
information widely and disseminate invitations for programme participation. Still, theseapproaches should be used with caution, as they may inadvertently introduce spam or
provocative messages, and there may be limits on how information shared on these platforms
can be held confidential or secure.

Making programme activities free of charge to beneficiaries
Take efforts to secure financial support for social mixing programmes elsewhere, so thatpeople from different groups and communities can take part in programme activities andengage in social mixing programmes​ regardless of their background. Programme organizers
might also offer gifts to acknowledge participants’ time and show their appreciation, ormaterials or vouchers related to programme activities (such as sporting equipment in relation
to sports activities, or kitchen supplies for cooking activities), as these tokens of appreciation
may further incentivize programme participation.

Making programme activities accessible to participants from different groups​​
Make sure that programme ​information and materials are available in each group’s first
language so that all members of participant communities can learn more about the
programme and participate fully in programme​ activities. Ensure that programme activities
are not scheduled during times that overlap with important dates for these communities, suchas times for prayer or religious holidays. Choose programme​ locations that are comparablyaccessible for people from each participant group, and provide transportation options if
needed. The more that programme organizers take the needs and concerns of each group
into account, and publicize features that address each group’s needs and concerns during
outreach, the more likely members of each community will feel like the programme isdesigned and intended for them.

44

INTRODUCTION TO CHAPTERS THREE AND FOUR
The next sections of this toolkit are designed to help community organizations andimplementing partners learn what steps, resources, and tools are needed to design and carryout impact evaluations of their social mixing programmes. Chapter III outlines importantfactors to consider when evaluating the impact of social mixing programmes, as well asrecommendations for how impact evaluations of social mixing programmes should bedesigned to yield the most useful information. Following this discussion, Chapter Fourdescribes key concepts and provides sample survey items for many commonly desired
outcomes of social mixing programmes.
It should be noted that the following two sections focus on evaluating the impact of social
mixing programmes. Therefore it is important to keep in mind that impact evaluation is only
one type of evaluation and should be part of a whole Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
system. IOM defines evaluation "as the systematic and objective assessment of an ongoing orcompleted intervention, including a project, programme, strategy or policy, its design,
implementation and results" (IOM, 2020a).
Evaluation helps us to understand why and how well something was achieved, and gives
judgment on the worth and merit of an intervention. Thereby it provides information that canbe derived from the use of evaluation criteria, such as consideration for impact, relevance,
efficiency, effectiveness, coverage, coordination, sustainability, connectedness and coherence(IOM, 2020a). Rigorous impact evaluation of a programme gives us information beyond
whether it has produced the desired impact or not. Impact evaluation helps us understand
why the intervention was (or was not) successful, which can in turn inform the design of future
programmes.
After gathering data about programme impact we must synthesize this information and makerecommendations for future programmes. Therefore, we need to integrate impact evaluationsof social mixing programmes into a broader comprehensive Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
system. We recommend that you contact your local or regional M&E focal point and consult
the IOM Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines when integrating the impact evaluation within
the larger M&E system.

45

Typically, social mixing programmes are implemented in community settings with the aim of
improving relations between groups that have been shaped by prejudice, tension, hostility,
and/or histories of conflict. Evaluations of these programmes are needed to understandwhether they can actually achieve their intended impacts, and to specify how and why suchprogrammes impact participants’ attitudes and behaviours, in order to make future social
mixing programmes as useful and effective as possible.
Despite the many benefits that can be gained from evaluation, relatively few social mixing
programmes have been evaluated using rigorous scientific methods. While programmes areoften informed by prior research and theory on intergroup contact, quantitative evaluations ofsocial mixing programmes have grown increasingly important — both to provide concrete
evidence of programme effectiveness to supporters and funders, and to ensure that the timeand energy invested by local partners and communities to implement these programmes help
them to achieve their intended goals.
These sections of the toolkit have been informed by insights from IOM staff who haveextensive experience conducting and evaluating social mixing programmes in many regions of
the world, along with decades of scholarly research on intergroup contact. Further insights
have grown from our own reflections and discussions with IOM teams and local partners while
collaborating on the design, implementation and impact evaluation of social mixing
programmes in many different countries during the development of this toolkit.

...

46

© IOM 2018/Julie BATULA

CHAPTER III
EVALUATING THE IMPACT OF
SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
Chapter Three outlines important factors toconsider when evaluating the impact ofsocial mixing programmes, as well asrecommendationsforhow
impactevaluations of social mixing programmes
should be designed to yield the most useful
information.​© IOM/IOM Austria, 2013.

II​I​ VALUATING THE IMPACTE
OF SOCIAL MIXINGPROGRAMMES

3.1. BASIC CONSIDERATIONS FOR EVALUATING THE
IMPACT OF PROGRAMMES
3. 2. DESIGNING IMPACT EVALUATIONS OF SOCIAL
MIXING PROGRAMMES​3. 3. MODES OF SURVEY ADMINISTRATION​​3. 4. PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND DATA ORGANIZATION​​48

An impact evaluation attempts to determine the entire range oflong-term change deriving from the intervention, including thepositive and negative, primary and secondary, long-term change
produced by the intervention, whether directly or indirectly,
intended or unintended.
(IOM, 2020a)

Local community members and returnees are renovating a school in Bouaké, Côte d’Ivoire. © IOM
2020/Mohamed DIABATÉ.

49

3.1. BASIC CONSIDERATIONS FOR EVALUATING THE IMPACT OF
PROGRAMMES​ efore going into some technical details, we cannot stress enough that the process ofB
programme evaluation needs (financial) resources and takes time and careful planning, and it
involves many steps to yield data that can be useful for analysis and informative for future
programme development.
Thus, rather than regarding evaluation, as an afterthought, you will want to make sure that the
impact evaluation is already considered in the project development phase. You need to makesure that programme organizers have the resources and expertise needed to design andconduct evaluations of social mixing programmes effectively or that you have the funds to getexternal support — much as you would prepare for implementing the social mixing
programme itself.​
...

...

...

For further information on how to consider
evaluation during project development andimplementation see the link​​IOM Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines​​50

A few very basic questions reveal many of the issues that need to be considered to conduct an
impact evaluation effectively, for example:

WHAT
What survey questions should we ask, to learn what we most need to know?
What type of compensation, if any, will be given to survey respondents?
What resources (human, financial, material, or other resources) are required to
conduct an impact evaluation of the programme?​

WHEN​
When will people be asked to complete survey questions?
How often will they be asked to complete survey questions, to track change over
time?

HOW
How will the sampling strategy be designed?
How will surveys be administered? In person? By telephone? Via internet?
Will the survey be self-administered by participants, or administered to participants
by enumerators?
​How might the mode of administration be determined by resources (or lack of)within the local setting or context?

WHERE
I​f in person, where will surveys be administered?
Are there places where people can offer private and confidential responses tosurvey questions?

WHO
Who will constitute the sample?
Who will be responsible for administering surveys? For tracking completion ofsurveys? For converting survey responses into data that can be used for analysis?
Might additional resources or team members be needed in order to complete thesetasks?

51

3. 2. DESIGNING IMPACT EVALUATIONS OF SOCIAL MIXINGPROGRAMMES ​We also wish to provide some guidance regarding how impact evaluations of social mixing
programmes should be designed to yield the most useful information and compelling
evidence concerning their outcomes. Conducting quantitative impact evaluations of social
mixing programmes​, using rigorous scientific procedures such as those outlined below, canenhance the confidence of organizations and donors in observed patterns of results, alongwith providing insights regarding possible changes that could further promote theprogramme's success.

Gather survey responses from people before and after the programme
To determine if or how people are affected byparticipating in your social mixing programme, it isnecessary to gather survey responses fromparticipants both before the programme begins (preprogramme assessment) and after the programme
ends (post-programme assessment). By comparing
participants’ pre-programme responses to theirpost-programme responses, you can begin to gain
some insights into ways in which their thoughts,
attitudes, and intentions toward other groups might
have changed through participating in your social
mixing programme.

​

Additionally, beyond gathering survey responses to assess outcomes directly following
programme participation, many organizations wish to examine whether their programmes
can have a lasting effect over longer periods of time.
Therefore, you may wish to gather surveys from participants at least two times following the
programme, to be able to test for effects of programme participation both immediately after
the programme ends (initial post-programme assessment) as well as several months after the
programme has ended (long-term post-programme assessment).​​52

Match survey responses from the same individuals across all times ofassessment

To conduct comparisons over time, you need to make sure that all survey responses fromthe same individuals are matched across all times of assessment. This matching of survey
responses is the only way to determine if or how each individual may have changed theirthoughts, attitudes, or intentions over time as a function of participating in your social
mixing programme.​ One challenge is that, at the same time as we seek to match
individuals’ survey responses across times of assessment, we also seek to keep their
responses as private and confidential as possible.
It is important to assure participants that you will maintain their survey responses in thestrictest of confidence, so that they will respond to survey questions as openly andhonestly as possible; at the same time, it is important to clarify that some personallyidentifying information will be gathered and maintained confidentially, and accessed only
by members of the research team, with the sole purpose of matching their survey
responses from different time points.​
In most cases, a reliable and effective way to match individuals’ survey responses acrosstime points is to have a designated member of the team (such as a survey administrator orenumerator) maintain a confidential list of randomly generated identification numbers thatare matched to individuals’ names.
At the time of survey administration, this team member can refer to the confidential list
and write the corresponding random identification number directly onto the individual’ssurvey before they are asked to complete the survey; alternatively, if survey questions areadministered via telephone or in-person interview, the team member can enter theindividual’s corresponding identification number directly into the form that is used torecord their survey responses.
If this approach is used, the designated team member should keep the confidential list
matching names and identification numbers in a secure location, and respondents should
be told not to write any other personally identifying information on the surveys, tomaintain the confidentiality of their survey responses.

© Maria Picassó i Piquer/creative commons.

53

What can you do if you can not have a designated member of the team
maintain a confidential list of randomly generated identification numbersthat are matched to individuals’ names?​

Find out in exactly 76 seconds. Click on thevideo​​or scan the QR Code to watch.

...

54

Gather and compare responses from “programme” and “comparison” groups
Another key feature of rigorous impact evaluation involves comparing the responses ofpeople who — and people who do not — participate in the programme of interest.

Do participate

Don't participate
...

...

Ideally, the people who do — and do not — participate in the programme of interest would be
as similar and comparable as possible, with the exception that some end up participating in
the programme and others do not.
Then, if meaningful change is observed over time among people who participate in the
programme, while no meaningful change is observed over time among people who do notparticipate in the programme, we can be more confident that the observed change is due toprogramme participation, rather than to other, extraneous factors (such as broader social,political, or economic circumstances that are external to the activities of the programme).​55

We can use the figure below as an illustration of the patterns of results we might expect toobserve when evaluating the impact of a social mixing programme. People who take part insocial mixing programming would constitute the “Programme” group (blue line), andpeople who do not take part in social mixing activities would be included as a “Comparison”
group (yellow line).
When assessed before the programme (pre-programme assessment, Time 1), on average,
attitudes toward other social groups appear to be very similar among people in the twogroups, suggesting that these two groups of people are fairly comparable before social
mixing activities take place.
However, when assessed after the programme (post-programme assessment,Time 2),
people in the Programme group appear to report substantially more positive attitudes
toward other social groups (higher scores on the vertical axis) relative to people in the
Comparison group.
Figure 1.
...

Some might wonder whether it is actually necessary to include a comparison group whenevaluating the impact of a social mixing programme. After all, we’re typically mostinterested in understanding how programme beneficiaries are affected by the social mixing
programmes we offer.
We have included three more figures below, as illustrations, to help explain why including
comparison groups may not only be helpful — but are oftentimes essential — to interpretthe patterns of results we observe in evaluations of social mixing programmes.

56

This second figure depicts results that might be observed when surveys are completed only
by people who engaged in social mixing activities. At first, we might be encouraged bythese results because they suggest that people’s attitudes toward other social groups grew
more positive over time, following their participation in social mixing activities.
Figure 2...

This third figure depicts a different pattern of results from what we might initially expect.
Here, both people who engaged in social mixing activities, and those who did not engage insocial mixing activities, showed more positive attitudes toward other social groups overtime. This pattern of finding suggests that there is something external to the social mixing
programme — rather than the social mixing programme itself — that is encouraging morepositive attitudes to develop over time.
Figure 3...

57This fourth figure depicts another pattern of possible results. Here, there appears to be no
positive change in attitudes toward other social groups among people who engaged insocial mixing activities. Without a comparison group, we might conclude that the social
mixing programming did not have the intended effect. By including a comparison group,
we can see that the social mixing programming might have had a buffering or mitigating
effect — and that social attitudes may have been even worse had social mixing activities
not taken place.
Figure 4...

​ e hope that by reflecting on these examples, you can begin to understand why includingW
comparison groups in evaluations of social mixing programmes can be valuable.​​58

If you are interested in including comparison groups when evaluating the impact of social
mixing programmes, you can do so in a few different ways:​
If you have many more people who are interested in participating in your social mixing
programme than spaces allow,▢ keep a waiting list of interested people;▢ in addition to providing them with future opportunities to participate, you can ask
them to complete surveys at the same times as those people who are participatingin your social mixing programmes (before the programme begins, and after the
programme ends).
In this way, you can ensure that people in the programme group and the comparisongroup are similar in terms of their initial interest in social mixing (to minimize what isreferred to as “selection bias”), with a main difference between them being that one
group actually experiences social mixing during the programme whereas the othergroup does not (Pettigrew, 2008).

I​f you are implementing a programme where people are required to work together inpairs or in small groups, you can:▢ pair half of the programme participants to work with people from another socialgroup,▢ while you can pair the other half of the programme participants to work only withpeople from their own social group.
In this way, you can ensure that people in the programme group and the comparisongroup will be similar in terms of the activities they do during the programme, with amain difference between them being that one half of the participants would experiencesocial mixing during these activities whereas the other half would not.

59Other approaches might involve recruiting comparison groups through other means. For
example, organizers might ask programme participants to nominate other people they know
who might be willing to complete surveys; these other people should be similar to participantsin terms of their demographic characteristics and the communities in which they live, but theyshould be different by not participating in the social mixing activities. Organizers can thenreach out to these individuals and ask if they might be willing to complete surveys at the sametime points as programme participants do, before and after the social mixing programming
occursAs another alternative, organizations might be able to recruit comparison groups from amongpeople who participate in their other community programmes, provided that they are involved
in similar types of activities and that they are not engaged in social mixing with other groups
during these activities. In these cases, organizers should consider offering small gifts or otherforms of compensation to people in the comparison group, to show appreciation for theirtime in completing surveys at two time points while not benefiting directly from the social
cohesion programming.

When possible, randomly assign people to ''programme'' and ''comparison'' groups
From the perspective of researchers who use rigorous scientific methods in impact evaluation,
it would be preferable to randomly assign people either to a group that engages in social
mixing activities, or to a group that does not engage in social mixing activities. This step canhelp to ensure that any differences in characteristics or preferences between individuals
would not influence how they participate in social mixing activities, or the results observed
following their participation in social mixing activities.
Thus, referring back to some examples from the previous section:...

If you have more people who are interested in participating in yoursocial mixing programme than spaces allow: rather than making
selections based on individual characteristics, flip a coin to
determine who will end up in the programme group, and who will
be asked to complete surveys as part of a comparison group, withthe understanding that people in the comparison group will begiven an opportunity to participate in the social mixing programme
at a later date.
If you are implementing a programme where people are required
to work together in pairs: work to recruit comparable numbers ofparticipants from different groups, and then flip a coin to
determine who will be paired with a member of another socialgroup as their partner during the programme (programme group),
and who will be paired with a member of their own social group as
their partner during the programme (comparison group).

60​ e understand that it might be tempting to assign people who are generally moreW
receptive to other groups to participate in social mixing activities, as compared tothose who tend to be more avoidant toward other groups, in order to facilitate
positive interactions between groups during the social mixing programme.​​ owever, from an impact evaluation perspective, this can actually make it moreH
challenging to observe desired effects of social mixing programmes. This​ isbecause people who are more receptive to other groups are already likely to havepositive attitudes toward those groups, and as such, their thoughts, attitudes, andintentions toward those groups are less likely to show positive change as a resultof participation in social mixing programmes.​​
We also understand that it might feel uncomfortable — or in some cases
inappropriate — to randomly assign people to different pairings or activities
within a social mixing programme. Indeed, in some collaborations between
academics and practitioners, greater emphasis has appropriately been placed on
the needs of individuals and communities than on the methodological value thatmight be gained from random assignment (Dehrone et al., 2021).
​ owever, in cases where random assignment of programme participants mightH
be possible, programme organizers should consider using strategies that would
allow for meaningful comparisons of people who do experience social mixing, anddo not experience social mixing, during their programmes.

61

Recruit balanced samples that are large enough to produce meaningful
results
Another factor to consider pertains to the number of individuals who will contribute survey
responses and upon which statistical analyses of impact evaluation data will be based (that is,
the size of the respondent sample). A general principle is that larger sample sizes tend to yield
more stable statistical results, and more stable results enhances confidence in our ability tointerpret findings accurately. As illustrated in the table below, ideally, samples would also be
fairly balanced in terms of the numbers of respondents representing different groups (forexample, members of host society and migrant communities) and in terms of the numbers of
respondents who either did or did not engage in social mixing activities (for example,
programme group and comparison group).

Members of migrantcommunity​

Members of host society​

Programme Group(with social mixing)​​30 individuals​​30 individuals

Comparison Group(without social mixing)​

30 individuals​30 individuals​Although larger samples are desirable from the perspective of statistical analysis, werecognize that some social mixing programmes intentionally recruit relatively small numbersof participants, either to deepen connections across group lines, or due to limited capacity orother logistical challenges. In cases where social mixing programmes have smaller numbers ofparticipants, we encourage programme organizers to think about ways in which responses
from programme participants might be combined for data analysis, for instance:
If the same social mixing programme is being run in several field sites at the same time, it
may be possible to pool survey responses from programme participants across sites tocreate a larger dataset for statistical analysis and impact evaluation.
If the same social mixing programme is being run several times with different cohorts ofparticipants each time, it may be possible to pool survey responses from all participantcohorts to create a larger dataset for statistical analysis and impact evaluation.
...

Many approaches may be possible and we encourage programme organizers to reach out
to specialists at IOM, or the authors of this toolkit, to learn more about what approaches
might work best for your programmes and the contexts in which you are working.​

62

3. 3. MODES OF SURVEY ADMINISTRATION
There are several ways in which survey responses can be gathered from respondents. The
most common approaches involve :having respondents complete surveys individually on their own, using paper-and-pencil
surveys, or surveys that are conducted online via computer, tablet, or smartphone;​
...

...

having enumerators conduct interviews with individual respondents to gather their
responses to survey questions, which may be done in person or via telephone.​​
...

...

If enumerators are used, we highly recommend that they be from the same ethnic
background, and are native speakers of the same native language, of the respondents withwhom they work. Below we describe some of the advantages and disadvantages of eachapproach, and we encourage organizations to consider both their own capacity andresources, and the capacities and resources of their respondents, when deciding whichapproach they might use.​

63

Having respondents complete surveys on their own
If respondents are asked to complete surveys individually on their own, a brief introduction
should be included before they are asked to respond to any survey questions, such as:​...

Thank you for agreeing to complete this survey. We are conducting this survey to learn
about your experiences living in ___[name of community]___ and about relations
between different groups in your community.
This survey will take approximately __[number]__ minutes to complete.
Please do your best to be as open and honest as possible in responding to thequestions in this survey, and know that you are free not to answer any question if you
don’t want to.
You are also free to withdraw your participation in this survey at any time.
Your survey responses will be kept confidential; we are only interested in patterns ofresponses, across many people, and not in the responses of any one individual; underno circumstances will your name be used when analysing responses or presenting
findings from this study in the future.

Advantages to this approach​

Disadvantages to this approach​Respondents
may
feel
more
comfortable completing surveys inprivate, which may produce less biased
responses;
Respondents are likely to complete
surveys faster when going throughthem on their own;
Enumerators are not necessary, soorganizers
canreservegreaterresources for other aspects of theirprogrammes.

Respondents need to have sufficient
literacy levels to understand andcomplete surveys on their own;
Respondents may be more likely toskip questions or provide fewer details
necessary to match responses acrosstime;
Respondents need to have stableinternet connections and ready accessto computers, tablets, or smartphones.

64Having enumerators conduct interviews with respondents

If enumerators are recruited to gather survey responses through interviews withrespondents, a brief introduction should be included before respondents are asked survey
questions, such as:...

Hello, my name is __[name]___. I am working with the International Organization for
Migration and we are conducting this survey to learn about your experiences living in___[name of community]___ and about relations between different groups in yourcommunity. I will be asking you a series of questions and this interview will lastapproximately __[number]__ minutes.
Please do your best to be as open and honest as possible in responding to thequestions I ask, and know that you are free not to answer any question if you don’t
want to. You are also free to stop the interview at any time.
The responses you provide will be kept confidential; we are only interested in patternsof responses, across many people, and not in the responses of any one individual;
under no circumstances will your name be used when analysing responses orpresenting findings from this study in the future.

Advantages to this approach​

Disadvantages to this approach​

Enumerators can ensure responses tosurvey questions are matched acrosstime points and recorded accurately;More resources are needed to hire andtrain enumerators, and for their travel
to field sites (for in person interviews);

Enumerators can clarify meaning ofsurvey questions for respondents withlow levels of education or literacy;
Conducting interviews does not
require respondents to have access toadvanced technology such as internet,
computers, tablets, or smartphones.

Reading questions aloud in interviews
requires more time than having people
read through surveys on their own;
Relative to responding in private, thepresence of an enumerator may leadsome people to be less open when
responding to certain survey questions.

65

3. 4. PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND DATA ORGANIZATIONI​n our experience, we find that many practitioners underestimate how muchcoordination and effort is necessary to pull all the different pieces together for
successful impact evaluations of programmes. We therefore wish to highlight a
few more points to help organizations and implementing partners envision
additional steps that may be necessary during the impact evaluation​.

Gaining approval for data collection​ eyond gaining approval to implement social mixing programmes, programmeBorganizers may also need to request approval from organizational partners andlocal authorities to collect data for the purposes of programme evaluation.
Depending on the context, and how politicized social cohesion goals are withinthat context, local authorities might also ask to review survey instruments andoffer suggested changes for wording before granting permission for survey
administration. Given the possibility of encountering some administrative hurdles,
obtaining approval for data collection could take longer than one might initially
expect.​​

Reintegration and recreation activities organized by IOM for returnees and community members in
Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire. © IOM 2020/ Mohamed ALY DIABATÉ.

66

Obtaining informed consent​ long with gaining approval for data collection from local partners and authorities, organizers
A
must seek out consent directly from the individuals who will be completing surveys for the
impact evaluation (or from their parents or legal guardians, in the case of minors). Informed
consent refers to providing people with information about why they are being asked tocomplete surveys and how their responses will be used, before they are asked to respond to
any survey questions.
Typically, respondents are assured that their responses will be kept confidential (to beaccessed only by members of the evaluation team) and their responses will only be analysedand presented in aggregate (to ensure that no responses of any one individual can be
identified).
These explanations should be given in clear and understandable language to ensure that
respondents, regardless of their educational background and language skills, understand theprovided information. After being provided with these assurances, respondents are thenasked to indicate their willingness (consent) to complete the survey measures, either verbally
before an in-person or telephone interview begins, or by signing a form before completing thesurvey on paper or online.
Please remember that compliance with IOM Data Protection Principles (Instruction 00138) is
mandatory within IOMs work.
...

You can find the instruction on IOM's Data Protection Principles, updated templates forvarious consent forms and many additional tools and information on the topic at the
dedicated page in the IOM Intranet:
IOM Intranet page on data protection​​(only accessible with an IOM account)
For further information on data protection, please see (accessible to all):IOM Data Protection Manual​​
IOM's dedicated page on data protection​​

67

Preparing translations of survey instruments and other relevant materials
For programmes involving social mixing between people who speak different languages,
gaining consent from all respondents will require translations of survey instruments, consent
forms, and other materials relevant to the goals of the evaluation. Even slight changes inwording of survey questions can sometimes alter their meaning and how they are understoodby respondents; we therefore recommend working with native speakers of each language or
professional translators to translate survey measures and related materials, in order toensure their accuracy. In addition, if and when surveys are to be administered in person,
enumerators will need to be recruited who speak the native language(s) of respondents fromeach participating group to facilitate data collection.​

Training project staff involved in data collection and organization
Any project staff involved in data collection need to be trained to understand the intentions
and content of the survey, how to gather surveys in an ethical manner and maintainconfidentiality of people’s survey responses, how to match survey responses from the same
individuals across times of assessment. This training is needed so that they will be wellprepared to answer participants’ questions regarding any of these topics during survey
administration. Once all survey responses are collected, project staff will also need guidance
regarding how the designated data analyst will require the data to be organized in preparation
for statistical analysis.
If you work with enumerators, particular attention should also be paid to their selection(gender balance, language skills, belonging to specific groups, etc.) and training. This should
include amongst others ethical standards such as the “Do no harm” principle andconfidentiality, data protection, how to approach vulnerable populations, handling referrals, a
detailed discussion of the questionnaire and technical details. Depending on the context andthe target group, additional topics might be relevant, for instance, when working with minors.
For IOM project managers, it is recommended to reach out to the local or regional researchand data units/focal points for advice.​​...

You can find more information on working with enumerators and related training in:
IOM’s DTM and Partners Toolkit​​

68

Following up to gather survey responses
The process of gathering survey responses can take a long time, especially when there areseveral different organizations involved in a project. It is very likely that trained project staff
will need to reach out to partner organizations or to intended respondents directly more thanonce, or several times, to gather as many complete survey responses as possible. For any
project, it is ideal to be able to successfully gather and match survey responses from allparticipants and across all times of assessment.
However, there will likely be some loss of data due to some individuals’ lack of continued
participation in the programme, or not wanting to complete surveys every time. At the veryminimum, organizations should strive to gather and match at least 80–85 per cent of thesurveys across time points; the higher the percentage of complete surveys gathered andmatched, the greater confidence you can have that any analyses based on those surveys willreflect general trends for your population as a whole, rather than reflecting the views of only a
few.
...

Some tips that might help you to maximize timely completion of surveys include:​​​ stablish agreed-upon timelines for data collection before and after the programmeEwith organizations and project staff involved in programme implementation andevaluation.
Keep an updated list of all individuals being asked to complete surveys (fromprogramme group and comparison group) that includes their contact information andwhen they are supposed to complete surveys across times of assessment (before
programme, directly after programme, several months after programme). Record all
surveys that have been completed, and those that still need to be completed, andupdate these records on a weekly basis.
Check in regularly with organizations and project staff, to ask about progress in meeting
goals for survey administration and data organization within the agreed-upontimelines.​69

Preparing for analysis of gathered survey responses
Once all survey responses have been gathered and matched across time points, some
additional steps may be necessary to prepare the survey responses for quantitative data
analysis, a process that typically involves converting individuals’ survey responses into
numbers that can be analysed using statistical procedures. In most cases, you will find it useful
to hire professional data analysts to help guide this process because it requires technicalknowledge and access to statistical software programmes.

...

IOM Offices can reach out to the IOM's Global Migration Data Analysis Centre (GMDAC)​for
support. Please consider this during the project development phase, as hiring an external
researcher and getting support from GMDAC must be included in the budget.

Next steps may vary depending on the original mode of survey administration. If surveys arecompleted online by respondents, or if an enumerator is trained to enter respondents'
answers into an online survey administration system, then individuals' responses can
automatically be converted into numerical data for statistical analysis.
If it is feasible to administer surveys using one of these online systems, we strongly
recommend going this route; although it will take some time to train enumerators in using thissoftware, it can save time in the long run by simplifying later steps needed to prepare data forstatistical analysis. If, however, respondents are asked to complete paper-and-pencil surveys,
or enumerators are asked to record survey responses by hand on a paper form, thenadditional steps will be needed to convert the handwritten records into data that can beanalysed. The designated data analyst should also be included in any discussions concerning
how to organize survey responses for statistical analysis.

...

For more information on IOM's Global Migration Data
Analysis Centre (GMDAC), go here: (GMDAC)​​If you are interested in online survey administration systems,
you can look at the following excamples:
Qualtrics​​
Kobo​​

70

Although analysts may have their own preferences for how data should be organized,
depending on the statistical software they use, there are some common ways in which data
are often organized, which we outline briefly below.
Select a computer programme for creating spreadsheets; programmes such as Excel are
not only useful for entering and organizing survey responses, but Excel spreadsheets canalso be transferred easily to be read by statistical software programmes.
In separate columns in the top row of the spreadsheet, you will want to enter the name ofeach variable — that is, each piece of information relevant to an individual’s survey
responses, including all relevant background information and their responses to every
single survey question at each time of assessment (see sample spreadsheet below).
Note that you will need to create separate columns for each survey question, and that
separate columns are needed for the same survey questions asked at different time points;
the data must be organized in this way so that the statistical software can recognize thedifference between a response to a question asked in the pre-programme survey, and a
response to the same question asked in the post-programme survey.
Once separate columns describing variable names have been entered into the top row of
the spreadsheet, data for each individual respondent can be entered. Keep in mind that alldata for each individual respondent must be entered into the same row in the spreadsheet.
Data entry for each respondent should include any and all variables that might be relevant
for data organization and analysis —​ including their randomly assigned identification
number, background information (such as group membership and other demographics),
whether they are completing surveys as part of a programme group or comparison group,and their responses to every survey question across every time of assessment.

Sample spreadsheet for organizing impact evaluation data​
Respondent
identification
number​​ espondent
R
identity group​​ rogramme orPcomparison​group​ re-survey
Pquestion 1​​14343143​​Migrant​​Programme

​1

​2

​4

​3

​15656547​​Host society​​Programme

​2

​2

​4

4​

​76530997​​Migrant​​Comparison​

​3

​2

​3

4​

​18723787​​Host society​​Comparison​

​2

​3

​4

​4

71

​ re-survey
Pquestion 2​​ ost-survey
Pquestion 1​​ ost-survey
Pquestion 2​

CHAPTER IV
MEASURING THE EFFECTS OF
SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMESIn this chapter, we describe some commonly
desired outcomes of social mixing programmes,
along with other concepts that may be relevant tointerpreting the effects of these programmes, andwe provide sample survey items designed tocapture each concept or outcome.

© IOM, 2020

IV

4.1. CORE OUTCOMES OF INTEREST FOR SOCIAL MIXINGPROGRAMMES​ EASURING THE EFFECTSM
OF SOCIAL MIXINGPROGRAMMES

4.2. ADDITIONAL CONCEPTS TO AID INTERPRETATION
OF THE EFFECTS OF SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES
4.3. ADDITIONAL CONCEPTS RELEVANT TO SOCIETALINSTABILITY
4.4. ADDITIONAL CONCEPTS RELEVANT TO CONTEXTSOF CIVIL CONFLICT
4.5. ADDITIONAL CONCEPTS FOR RELATIONS BETWEENMIGRANT AND RECEIVING COMMUNITIES

73

...

What do we outline in Chapter IV
Listen to 39 seconds AUDIO Introduction
Click HERE​​74​ s you read through this section, you may wonder why several questions have beenA
included to capture each concept, rather than including only one question per concept.
Survey questions corresponding with each concept may seem similar, but multiple items
should be included when assessing each concept for a variety of reasons. Importantly, any
single question may only tap a part of the concept of interest, and we therefore include
multiple questions to capture many aspects of complex concepts. From an analysis
standpoint, including multiple questions also allows us to test whether people’s responses
across questions correspond with each other (as they should), which helps us to gain more
confidence that their responses to survey questions are as intended, reliable, andconsistent. We understand that including multiple questions for each concept can present
some challenges, such as making the survey longer, frustrating respondents or possibly
affecting response rates; but we highly recommend including at least two survey questions
to measure each concept. Ultimately, all these factors need to be considered when
deciding on thefinal structure of an evaluation survey.
The concepts and survey questions described below have grown from extensive
discussions with staff in IOM offices located in many parts of the world.

Please note that, in most of the sample questions listed below, you will see the term“[group]” included as part of each question. This term is intended to be a placeholder forthe group about which you wish to ask respondents their thoughts, attitudes, andintentions. For example, in the case of Ecuador, Ecuadorian respondents may be asked
about their thoughts, attitudes, and intentions toward “Venezuelans” whereas in Bosnia
and Herzegovina, Bosniaks and Serbs may be asked about their thoughts, attitudes, andintentions toward one another.
In cases where you wish to have respondents from different groups respond to survey
questions regarding their thoughts, attitudes, and intentions toward each other, you will
want to develop different versions of the survey for respondents from different groups.
Using the case of Türkiye for the purposes of illustration, developing a different version of
the survey for each group of respondents will allow you to have one version designed for
Turkish respondents (in Turkish) that asks questions about how they feel toward “Syrians”
as a group, and a separate version for Syrian respondents (in Arabic) that asks questions
about how they feel toward “Turks” as a group.
Thus, if and when you use some of the survey questions below to evaluate the impact ofsocial mixing programmes, you will want to (a) modify each survey question by replacing“[group]” with the specific name of the social group relevant to your respondents in thelocal context, and (b) create distinct versions of the survey for respondents from eachgroup, in their own native language.

...

I​f you plan to use the measures in the toolkit to evaluate your social
mixing programme, or if you have questions about constructing asurvey for impact evaluation, we strongly encourage you to contact
the authors of this toolkit (Linda Tropp, tropp@umass.edu, and Liora
Morhayim, lmorhayim@umass.edu) or the IOM RO Vienna LMI unit
(roviennalmi@iom.int).

75

4.1. CORE OUTCOMES OF INTEREST FOR SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMESTo begin, we wish to highlight several key concepts that are likely to be of interest as potential
outcomes of social mixing programmes. Below we provide a brief description of each concept,
and sample survey questions that may be used to assess each concept.

Attitudes
Intergroup attitudes involve subjective evaluations that can indicate varying levels of liking andwarmth toward other groups. It is important to measure attitudes because negative attitudes
are often associated with intergroup conflict and discriminatory intentions and behaviour
toward other groups. Generally, we expect that greater social mixing between groups willcorrespond with groups having more positive attitudes toward each other.

Sample Survey Questions​
1. When you think about people who are [group], how much do you feel negatively or
positively toward them?
​1​2​very negative​3
negative​4​neither​5​positive​very positive

2. When you think about people who are [group], how much do you feel hostile or friendly
toward them?
​1​2​very hostile​3
hostile​4​neither​5
friendly​very friendly

3. When you think about people who are [group], how much do you feel distant from or close
to them?
​1​2​very distant​3​distant​4​neither​5​close​very close

4. When you think about people who are [group], how much do you feel different from orsimilar to them?
​1​very different​2​3​different​4​neither76​5​similar​very similarAnxiety
Anxiety refers to the feelings of discomfort, lack of ease, awkwardness, and/or anxiousness
one might feel about engaging with or anticipating interaction with members of other groups.
Greater feelings of anxiety tend to correspond with greater desire to avoid cross-groupinteractions and reduced willingness to engage in future intergroup contact (Tropp, 2021), as
well as with higher levels of intergroup prejudice (Finchilescu, 2010; Stephan and Stephan,1985). The presence of anxiety can contribute to exacerbating tensions in relations between
groups, whereas reducing anxiety can help to encourage greater social mixing withinprogrammes as well as within day-to-day life.

Sample Survey Questions​
1. When you think about being around people who are [group], how much do you feel
uncomfortable or comfortable around them?
​1

​2

​3

​ ery
v
uncomfortableuncomfortable​4​neither​5​comfortable​ eryv
comfortable

2. When you think about being around people who are [group], how much do you feel anxious
or relaxed around them?
​1​2​very anxious​3
anxious​4​neither​5
relaxed​very relaxed

3. When you think about being around people who are [group], how much do you feel
insecure or confident around them?
​1​very insecure​2​3​insecure​4​neither77​5​confident​very confidentEmpathy
Empathy involves one’s capacity for caring about the experiences of others, and it may also
involve one’s ability to understand and share the thoughts and feelings of another person, or
to put oneself in the shoes of another person. Measuring empathy across group lines isimportant because it can often lead to prosocial behaviour and concern for the welfare ofgroups beyond one’s own. Greater contact between groups is typically associated with greater
empathic concern regarding how other groups are treated and greater attention to how othergroups might see the world.

Sample Survey Questions​
1. ​I care about the experiences of [group].
​1​2​ isagreedstrongly​3
disagree​4​neither​5​agree​ greeastrongly

2. I am motivated to understand the thoughts and feelings of [group].​​1​2​ isagreedstrongly​3
disagree​4​neither​5​agree​ greeastrongly

3. I feel compassion when I think about the experiences of [group].
​1​2​ isagreedstrongly​3
disagree​4​neither78​5​agree​agreestronglyTrustTrust in other groups involves believing that members of other groups can be trusted; thismeans that we feel members of other groups are reliable, and that we expect members ofother groups will not try to take advantage of our vulnerability. Measuring trust is importantbecause building trust is a crucial step in the de-escalation of conflict (Kelman, 2007; Tam etal., 2009). Trust allows people to take the risk of being vulnerable in the presence of othergroups, which typically allows for deepening bonds between groups, enhancing people’s
willingness to take steps toward cooperation and reconciliation, and diminishing concerns
about being exploited.

Sample Survey Questions​
1. ​Generally, I feel I can trust most people who are [group].
​1​2​ isagreedstrongly​3
disagree​4​neither​5​agree​ greeastrongly

2.​Overall, I feel that most [group] can be trusted.
​1​2​ isagreedstrongly​3
disagree​4​neither79​5​agree​agreestrongly

Metaperceptions
Metaperceptions are our beliefs about how other people perceive us (or our groups). Because
our attitudes often have a reciprocal nature, the beliefs we have about how other groups see
us shape our own feelings and attitudes toward those groups (Frey and Tropp, 2006). The
more negative our metaperceptions, the less willing we are to trust members of other groups
or to interact with them (O’Brien et al., 2018). Note that, for these items, the term “[people in
my community]” can be replaced with the name of the respondent’s own social group.

Sample Survey Questions​
1. ​Most [group] think that [people in my community] cannot be trusted.
​1​2​ isagreedstrongly​3
disagree​4​neither​5​agree​ greeastrongly

2.​​Most [group] think that [people in my community] don’t like them.
​1​2​ isagreedstrongly​3
disagree​4​neither​5​agree​ greeastrongly

3. ​Most [group] think that [people in my community] don’t respect them.
​1​2​ isagreedstrongly​3
disagree​4​neither80​5​agree​ greeastrongly​Willingness for future contact​
Research shows that contact between groups has the potential to improve intergroupattitudes and foster greater feelings of trust and empathy between groups. However, thispositive potential can only be realized to the extent that members of different groups remain
willing to engage in contact with each other (Ron et al., 2017). Transforming relations between
groups often requires repeated social mixing experiences over time, so that members ofdifferent groups can begin to develop meaningful connections and cross-group relationships(Pettigrew, 1997).

Sample Survey Questions​
1. I would be open to having a [group] person as a neighbour.
​1​2​ isagreedstrongly​3
disagree​4​neither​5​agree​agreestrongly

2. I would be open to having a [group] person as a close friend.
​1​2​ isagreedstrongly​3
disagree​4​neither​5​agree​ greeastrongly

3. ​I would be open to having a [group] person in my home.
​1​2​ isagreedstrongly​3
disagree​4​neither​5​agree​agreestrongly

4. ​I would be open to having a [group] person as a family member.
​1​2​ isagreedstrongly​3
disagree​4​neither81​5​agree​ greeastrongly

Options for measures to complement survey responses ​In addition to relying on self-report measures of people’s thoughts, attitudes, andintentions toward other groups, we highly recommend that some behavioural measures
be included as well. For a variety of reasons, people’s intentions to engage in contact withother groups do not always translate into actual social mixing behaviour. People may
experience social pressure from family, friends, or the broader community to avoid
contact with other groups, or societal structures like segregation can make it morechallenging for members of different groups to have opportunities to interact with eachother. Thus, it can be useful to include behavioural measures that complement
respondents’ reports of their openness to intergroup contact. Behavioural indicators arelikely to vary depending on how social mixing programmes are structured, and whether
future opportunities for social mixing might be possible. However, some options to
consider are:Tracking over time whether respondents sign up for future social mixing or crosscommunity events;
Tracking over time whether respondents actually attend the future social mixing or
cross-community events for which they sign up;
Asking respondents to report how often they cross group lines in their daily life, such as
by going to restaurants or stores owned by members of other groups, or donating
money or time to causes and organizations that support the interests of other groups.

4.2. ADDITIONAL CONCEPTS TO AID INTERPRETATION OF THE EFFECTS
OF SOCIAL MIXING PROGRAMMES​ eyond the core concepts outlined above, we highly recommend including measures ofBseveral additional concepts that can help programme organizers and data analysts tointerpret the effects of social mixing programmes meaningfully and effectively. Since social
mixing between groups does not occur in a vacuum, we also need to consider the pre-existing
nature of relations between groups in communities where social mixing activities take place.
Many of the factors mentioned below concern people’s prior intergroup experiences andongoing dynamics between groups in the larger social context, as these might shape their
responses to social mixing programmes. Taking into account these factors can givepractitioners greater insight regarding why social mixing programmes may be more or lesseffective for certain people in certain contexts.

82Respondent characteristics
At a basic level, we recommend including some survey questions that ask respondents toreport their demographic characteristics such as their age, gender, race or ethnicity, religion,level of education, and any other characteristics that may be relevant to shaping relations
between groups in the local context. It is often helpful to have this information to examine
whether the effects of social mixing programmes are similar or different for people fromdifferent subgroups of the populations involved.
Construals of group relations​
Construals of group relations refer to people’s broad understandings of how groups are
expected to relate to each other in the local context (Burrows et al., 2022). These construals
may shape people’s willingness to engage in contact with other groups, at the same time as
contact with other groups may help to shift people’s understandings of how groups relate toeach other in the larger society. Note that, for these items, the term “people in yourcommunity” can be replaced with the name of the respondent’s own social group; this change
in wording may help respondents to reflect on the nature of relations between their owngroup and another group in the local context.

Sample Survey Questions​
1. Generally, when you think about relations between people in your community and [group],
how much do you perceive their relations to be...
▢ ...in conflict or in harmony?
​1​2​Completely in
conflict​​3
In conflict​​4​Neither​5
In harmony​​Completely inharmony​▢ ...competitive or cooperative?
​1​2
Completely
competitive​3
Competitive​4​Neither​5
Cooperative

Completely
cooperative▢ ...as enemies or allies?
​1​2​Completely
enemies​3
Enemies​4​Neither83​5
AlliesCompletely
AlliesNorms for cross-group relations​Norms for cross-group relations refer to shared social standards that suggest whether andhow people from different groups should (or should not) engage with each other (De TezanosPinto et al., 2010​). Even when social mixing programmes are effective, perceived norms forcross-group relations among family members, friends, and one’s local community can limit thedegree to which people openly express positive attitudes, or engage in future contact, withmembers of other groups (Ata et al., 2009).

Sample Survey Questions​
1. My family and friends would approve of my spending time with people who are [group].
​1​2​ isagreedstrongly​3
disagree​4​neither​5​agree​ greeastrongly

2. My family and friends would support my becoming friends with people who are [group].
​1​2​ isagreedstrongly​3
disagree​4​neither​5​agree​ greeastrongly

3. In general, people in my local community would approve of my spending time with people
who are [group].
​1​2​ isagreedstrongly​3
disagree​4​neither​5​agree​ greeastrongly

3. In general, people in my local community would support my becoming friends with people
who are [group].
​1​2​ isagreedstrongly​3
disagree​4​neither84​5​agree​ greeastrongly

Prior contact experience​Research suggests that contact can have the most transformative change for people who have
had limited prior contact with other groups, or less positive attitudes toward other groups
starting out. It can therefore be useful to include measures of prior contact in pre-programme
assessments; knowing how much (or how little) prior contact members of different groups
have had with each other can help organizers and data analysts understand how these priorexperiences may shape the effects of social mixing programmes (Dhont and Van Hiel, 2009;
Pettigrew and Tropp, 2006).

Sample Survey Questions​
1. How many [group] would you say you know personally, at least as acquaintances?
​1

​2

​3

​4

​5

none

​5 or more

2. How many [group] would you consider to be friends?
​1

​2

​3

​4

none

​5
​5 or more

Measuring the contact that occurs during social mixing programmes​
In addition to learning about people’s contact experiences before participating in social
cohesion programmes, it is important to gain a sense of how much contact they actuallyexperience during social cohesion programming. This step allows for direct tests ofgeneralization — that is, how much positive contact experiences during social mixing
programmes translate into more positive thoughts, attitudes, and intentions toward othergroups overall (González and Brown, 2003; Mousa, 2020). On the next page look at someexamples of survey questions that can be included in post-programme assessments tomeasure the quantity and quality of the contact members of different groups have witheach other.​85

Sample Survey Questions​
Instructions: Please think about the people you met during this programme who are [group] as you respondto the following questions.​
1. After participating in this programme, how many of the people who are [group] would you say you know
personally, at least as acquaintances?
​1

​2

​3

​4

​5

none

​5 or more

2. After participating in this programme, how many of the people who are [group] would you consider to befriends?
​1

​2

​3

​4

​5

none

​5 or more

3. When you think about the [group] people you met during this programme, how much do you feel negatively
or positively toward them?
​1​2very negative​3
negative​4
neither​5
positivevery positive

4. When you think about the [group] people you met during this programme, how much do you feel hostile orfriendly toward them?
​1​2very hostile​3
hostile​4neither​5
friendlyvery friendly

5. When you think about the [group] people you met during this programme, how much do you feel distantfrom or close to them?
​1​2very distant​3
distant​4
neither​5
closevery close

6. When you think about the [group] people you met during this programme, how much do you feel different
from or similar to them?
​1​2very different​3
different​4neither86​5
similarvery similar​4.3. ADDITIONAL CONCEPTS RELEVANT TO SOCIETAL INSTABILITY
Possible effects of social mixing programmes may also be sensitive to varying degrees ofstability or instability in the local context. We therefore present sample questions that could
be used to assess a number of concepts that tap people’s perspectives, concerns, andexperiences during periods of instability that may be taken into account when evaluating theeffects of social mixing programmes.
Generalized trust
Beyond assessing trust toward members of particular groups, more general assessments oftrust provide an indicator of feelings of psychological safety and security within the broader
society (Hooghe, 2009; Uslaner, 2012). Especially in contexts with high levels of societal or
economic instability, people may be wary of trusting others (Sapsford et al., 2015).
Sample Survey Questions
1. In general, it feels like most people in this country can be trusted.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

2. Overall, it feels like people in this country trust each other.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

87

​5
agree

agree
strongly​Perceptions of safety and security
Related to the themes described above, people’s perceptions of safety and security constitutean important part of the overall health and vitality of the society in which social mixing
programmes might take place (Institute for Economics & Peace, 2021; Syropoulos, 2020).
Sample Survey Questions
1. The place I live in is basically a safe, stable, and secure place.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

2. The place where I live is a dangerous and unpredictable place.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

3. I generally feel safe in the place where I live.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

88

​5
agree

agree
strongly

​Psychological well-being and life satisfaction
Measures of well-being and life satisfaction tap how much people generally feel happy andsatisfied with their lives, and how much hope they have for their futures (Diener et al., 1985;
Goldberg and Williams, 1988). Concepts like these may illuminate how societal conditions ofconflict shape individuals’ sense of well-being (Rimé et al., 2011), which may in turn shape if
and how they engage with other groups.
Sample Survey Questions​Think about how you have been feeling lately, such as during the last few weeks, as you
respond to the following statements.
1. I often feel I have control over my life.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

2. I often feel happy, all things considered.
​1​2disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

3. I can envision a future for my life.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

4. Overall, I am satisfied with my life.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

89

​5
agree

agree
strongly

4. 4. ADDITIONAL CONCEPTS RELEVANT TO CONTEXTS OF CIVIL
CONFLICTIn contexts with histories of protracted civil conflict, people’s thoughts, attitudes, andintentions typically align with the goals and interests of their own groups, whereas they tend
to assume the worst of intentions among others with whom they have been in conflict. We
therefore offer a number of concepts tapping ways in which people’s perspectives may be
shaped by conflict, so that these can be taken into account when evaluating the impact ofsocial mixing programmes implemented in a post-conflict context.
Group identification
Generally, groups in conflict tend to identify strongly with their own community, and they are
motivated to maintain positive views of their community and the actions of its members(Tajfel and Turner, 1979). The more strongly people identify with their groups, the more
motivated they are to maintain positive views of their groups (Cairns et al., 2006) and the lesswilling they are to take steps toward reconciliation or to forgive harms enacted by othergroups during conflict (Voci et al., 2015). Note that, for these items, the term “[a member of mycommunity]” can be replaced with the name of the respondent’s own social group.
Sample Survey Questions
1. Being [a member of my community] is an important part of who I am.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

2. I identify strongly with being [a member of my community].
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

90

​5
agree

agree
strongly

Competitive victimhood​​​As part of the broader conflict narratives that perpetuate tensions between groups (Bar-Tal,2007), competing narratives exist regarding who has suffered most as a result of the conflict(Noor et al., 2012; Vollhardt and Bilali, 2015). People who perceive that their group has
suffered more than other groups are more likely to justify violence against other groups andto empathize less with other groups with whom they experience conflict (Čehajić et al., 2009;
Noor et al., 2012). Note that, for these items, the term “[country]” can be replaced with thename of the relevant country and the term “[my community]” can be replaced with the nameof the respondent’s own social group.
Sample Survey Questions
1. No other group in [country] has suffered the way that [my community] has.
​1

​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

2. Throughout the conflict in [country], more harm has been done to [my community] than toany other group of people.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

Attributions of responsibility and acknowledgement of harm
Along with being inclined to see their own groups as victims of others’ wrongdoing, people
seek to see their group as less responsible for initiating violence or perpetuating conflict,relative to how they see other groups (Bilali and Vollhardt, 2019; Halevy et al., 2022). Relatedly,
people seek to preserve positive views of their own group by denying the role their group has
played in perpetuating the conflict and causing harm to other groups (Bilali, et al., 2019;Čehajić-Clancy, 2015). However, the more members of different groups have contact with eachother, the more they become willing to acknowledge the harms their group have inflicted onother groups during conflict (Čehajić and Brown, 2010). Note that, for these items, the term“[country]” can be replaced with the name of the relevant country and the term “[people in mycommunity]” can be replaced with the name of the respondent’s own social group.​

91

Sample Survey Questions
1. [Group] has played a greater role in perpetuating conflict between groups than [people in
my community].
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

2. Over the course of the conflict, [group] has been more responsible for inciting violence
between groups than [people in my community].
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

2. I am ready to acknowledge that [people in my community] have contributed to perpetuating
conflict between groups in [country].
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

2. I acknowledge that [people in my community] must take some responsibility for inciting
violence between groups in [country].
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

92

​5
agree

agree
strongly

Hope for improved relations between groups​​
Groups embroiled in protracted conflict tend to lose hope that more peaceful relations
between groups is possible (Bar-Tal, 2007; Kelman, 1999). But the more people have hope for
improved relations between groups in the future, the less they desire to retaliate against othergroups with whom they have been in conflict; maintaining hope and belief in the possibility of
improved relations in the future is, therefore, important to assess in conflict settings (CohenChen et al., 2014). Note that, for these items, the term “[country]” can be replaced with thename of the relevant country and the term “[people in my community]” can be replaced with
the name of the respondent’s own social group.
Sample Survey Questions
1. There’s no use in trying to improve relations between groups in [country] because thatprobably won’t happen.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

2. I am hopeful that, in the future, relations between [people in my community] and [group]
will be better than they are today.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

3. I believe [people in my community] and [group] have a common desire to live in peace.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

93

​5
agree

agree
strongly

4.5. ADDITIONAL CONCEPTS FOR RELATIONS BETWEEN MIGRANT AND
RECEIVING COMMUNITIESAs a contrast to contexts of protracted civil conflict, tensions between groups may arise due torecent patterns of migration and the settlement of new arrivals within a receiving community. We
include measures of concepts that may be relevant to relations between newly arrived migrantcommunities and members of the host society, and these emerging relations may serve as a
backdrop for social mixing programmes implemented in these spaces.
Nationality, citizenship and residence status
To examine relations between members of migrant communities and the host society, surveys
must ask respondents about each person'snationality and citizenship. In some contexts, aperson'sresidence statusmight be relevant as well and should be included in the survey.Below
are some sample items to assess these concepts. Note, for these questions, the term “[thiscountry]” may be replaced with the name of the country in question.​
1. In which country were you born?
​a)▢ 1 Host Society▢ 0 Other Country, write name of country in space provided:_____________________________
If response to (a) is “0” (Other Country), ask (b) and (c) as next two questions:(b) What year did you come to [this country]?
(c) How old were you when you first moved toWrite year of arrival: _____________[this country]? Write age in years:________________________

2. Besides the country you were born in, did you live in another country for more than one year?
▢ 1 Yes▢ 0 No3. (a) Are you a citizen of [this country]?
▢ 1 Yes▢ 0 Noif response to (a) is “0” (No), ask (b) as the next question(b) What kind of residence document/identity card do you possess?
Write here: _____________________________

Please keep in mind that questions about citizenship and residence status might be sensitive depending on
the context and the individual you are talking to.

94

Language proficiency
In order to facilitate contact, migrants and host society members must have some way ofcommunicating with each other (Servidio et al., 2021). Greater contact experience may also
lead people to become more interested in learning another group's language (Joyce et al.,2016). Thus, in cases where migrants and host society members have different native
languages, respondents should be asked about their ability to communicate in each language.
Note, for these questions, the terms ''[host community language]'' and ''[migrant community
language]'' can be replaced with the name of corresponding languages.
Sample Survey Questions
1. Overall, how well can you speak and understand [receiving community language]?
​1​2
not at all​3
a little​4
somewhat​5
wellvery well

2. Overall, how well can you speak and understand [migrant community language]​1​2
not at all​3
a little​4
somewhat

95

​5
well

very well

Belonging
Along with societal institutions and practices, migrants’ experiences and interactions withpeople in the receiving community may signal acceptance or rejection in ways that shape theirexperiences of social integration and resettlement (Council of Europe, 2012; Pierce, 2019;
Simonsen, 2017). At the same time, feelings of belonging among host society members maychange or become threatened as more diverse newcomers establish themselves (Craig andRicheson, 2014; Plaut et al., 2011). Note, for these questions, the term “[this country]” may bereplaced with the name of the country in question.
Sample Survey Questions
1. I feel like I belong in [this country].
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

2. I feel at home in [this country].
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

96

​5
agree

agree
stronglyWelcoming others and feeling welcomedWelcoming contexts and attitudes within the host society play important roles in creating a
sense of belonging and inclusion among migrants (Fussell, 2014; Williamson, 2018). It istherefore useful to consider the extent to which host society members seek to welcome
migrants, and the extent to which migrants feel welcomed by members of the host society(Tropp et al., 2018). Note, for these questions, the term “[this country]” may be replaced with
the name of the country in question.
Sample Survey Questions
1. I think people in [this country] try to make migrants feel welcome here.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

2. I feel welcome in [this country].
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

97

​5
agree

agree
stronglyAcculturation preferences
Acculturation preferences reveal people’s feelings about how migrants should become
integrated within the host society. Research suggests that migrants typically prefer to maintainaspects of their native heritage, whereas people from the host society typically prefer for
migrants to reduce how much they adhere to practices from their native heritage (Brown andZagefka, 2011; Zagefka and Brown, 2002). Note, for these questions, the term “[this country]”
may be replaced with the name of the country in question.
Sample Survey Questions
1. I think it is important that migrants in [this country] keep their way of life.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

2. I think it is important that migrants in [this country] maintain their heritage and culture.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

3. I think it is important that migrants in [this country] maintain their language and religious
practices.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

98

​5
agree

agree
strongly

Attitudes toward immigration – for host society members onlyAttitudes toward immigration among members of the host society are often shaped by fears
about how the presence of migrants might change the host society or their way of life
(Hainmueller and Hopkins, 2014). But the more that people from the host society interact with
migrants, the more likely they are to become willing to support welcoming immigration
policies (Berg, 2009).
Survey questions
2. Migrants improve this country by introducing new ideas and cultures.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

2. The presence of people from other nations is good for this country.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

99

​5
agree

agree
stronglyPerceived threat – for host society members onlyThreat is experienced when members of one group perceive that another group is likely tocause them harm, such as by limiting their access to material resources and/or changing their
way of life (Kinder and Sanders, 1996; Stephan and Stephan, 2000). Perceived threat is mostcommonly assessed among host society members in relation to newcomers, or among moreprivileged groups in relation to disadvantaged groups. Threats posed by other groups cannegatively affect intergroup relations (Stephan et al., 2002); however, greater contact between
groups tends to be associated with lower levels of perceived threat (Knowles and Tropp, 2018;
Wagner et al., 2006). Note, for these questions, the term “[this country]” may be replaced with
the name of the country in question, and the term “[people in my community]” can be
replaced with the name of the respondent’s own social group.
Sample Survey Questions
1. The more [group] there are in [this country], the more the physical safety and security of [people in mycommunity] are threatened.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

2. The more [group] there are in [this country], the more the norms and values of [people in my community]
are threatened.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

3. The more [group] there are in [this country], the more the social and political influence of [people in mycommunity] are threatened.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

​5
agree

agree
strongly

4. The more [group] there are in [this country], the more the economic power and welfare of [people in mycommunity] are threatened.
​1​2
disagreestrongly​3
disagree​4neither

100

​5
agree

agree
strongly

CONCLUSION
With ever-increasing patterns of global migration and growing sociopolitical, economic andenvironmental instabilities in the world, achieving peaceful relations between groups has
become one of the most pressing issues of our time. Working to promote social cohesion by
navigating differences and fostering meaningful connections across group boundaries has
never been more important.
This toolkit has been designed to provide IOM staff and partners with evidence-based
recommendations on how to design, implement and evaluate the impact of social mixing
programmes. With this guidance, we aim to support IOM staff and partners in achieving theirintended goals, by helping to enhance the effectiveness of social mixing programmes and byencouraging them to use evidence-based practices and conduct rigorous impact evaluationsof social mixing programmes to reveal their impacts. We recognize the incredible amount ofwork that goes into designing, implementing, and evaluating the impact of social mixing
programmes effectively, and we thank IOM and its partners for all their efforts to build social
cohesion, strengthen communities, and promote peaceful relations between groups throughsocial mixing programmes.

Two teams with Syrian and Turkish players meet in the final matchof an IOM-organized football tournament. © IOM 2021/ Nadine AL
LAHHAM.

101

102© Sakina Saïdi/creative commons.

We value your opinion!

Click HERE​​
to share your thoughts about this Toolkit!
Or scan the QR code...

​Regional Office for South-Eastern Europe, Eastern
Europe and Central Asia
Dampfschiffstrasse 4 / 10-111030 Vienna, Austria
Tel.: +43 1 581 22 22
Email: rovienna@iom.int
Website: https://rovienna.iom.int/

103

BIBLIOGRAPHY*
Academic literature
Ata, A., B. Bastian and D. Lusher
2009

Intergroup contact in context: The mediating role of social norms and group-based perceptions on thecontact–prejudice link. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 33(6):498–506.​

Bar-Tal, D.
2007

Sociopsychological foundations of intractable conflicts. American Behavioral Scientist, 50(11):1430–1453.​

Berg, J. A.
2009
2018​

Core networks and whites’ attitudes toward immigrants and immigration policy. Public opinion quarterly,73(1):7–31.​​

Bilali, R. and J. R. Vollhardt
2019​

Victim and perpetrator groups’ divergent perspectives on collective violence: Implications for intergrouprelations.Political Psychology, 40:75–108.​

Bilali, R., Y. Iqbal and C. Erisen
2019​ he role of lay beliefs about group transgressions in acceptance of responsibility for ingroup harm‐doing.
T
European Journal of Social Psychology, 49(5):992–1006.​

Council of Europe
2012​The Council of Europe: structure, history and issues in European politics. Routledge.​

Brown, R. and H. Zagefka
2011

The dynamics of acculturation: An intergroup perspective. Advances in experimental social psychology, 44:129–
184, Academic Press.​Cairns, E., J. Kenworthy, A. Campbell and M. Hewstone
2006​ he role of in‐group identification, religious group membership and intergroup conflict in moderating in‐Tgroup and out‐group affect. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45(4):701–716.​

Cao, B. and W. Y. Lin
2017

Revisiting the contact hypothesis: Effects of different modes of computer-mediated communication onintergroup relationships. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 58:23–30.​Čehajić-Clancy, S.
2015

Dealing with ingroup committed atrocities: Moral responsibility and group-based guilt. The social psychology of
intractable conflicts. Springer, Cham:103–115.​​Čehajić, S. and R. Brown
2010

Silencing the past: Effects of intergroup contact on acknowledgment of in-group responsibility. Social
psychological and personality science, 1(2):190–196.​​Čehajić, S., R. Brown, and R. González
2009

What do I care? Perceived ingroup responsibility and dehumanization as predictors of empathy felt for thevictim group. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 12(6):715–729.​*​All hyperlinks were working at the time of writing this toolkit.

104

Cohen-Chen, S., E. Halperin, R. J. Crisp and J. Gross2014​ ope in the Middle East: Malleability beliefs, hope, and the willingness to compromise for peace. Social
H
Psychological and Personality Science, 5(1):67–75.

Craig, M. A. and J. A. Richeson
2014​ ore diverse yet less tolerant? How the increasingly diverse racial landscape affects white Americans’ racial
M
attitudes.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(6):750–761.​

Dehrone, T., B. Burrows, L. R. Tropp, R. Bilali and G. Morrisson2021​ wubakane: Contact-based programs to strengthen social cohesion in post-genocide Rwanda. In: Innovative
T
Stigma and Discrimination Reduction Programs (A. Nordstrom and W. Goodfriend, eds.). Taylor & Francis.​

De Tezanos‐Pinto, P., C. Bratt and R. Brown
2010

What will the others think? In‐group norms as a mediator of the effects of intergroup contact. British Journalof Social Psychology, 49(3):507–523.​

Dhont, K. and A. Van Hiel2009

​ e must not be enemies: Interracial contact and the reduction of prejudice among authoritarians.Personality
Wand individual differences, 46(2):172–177.​

Diener, E. D., R. A. ​Emmons, R. J. Larsen and S. Griffin
1985

The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of personality assessment, 49(1):71–75.​

Dragolov G., Z. a Ignácz, J. Lorenz, J. Delhey and K.Boehnke
2013​

Social Cohesion Radar: Measuring Common Ground – An international comparison of social cohesion.
Bertelsmann Stiftung, Gütersloh.​Finchilescu, G.
2010

Intergroup anxiety in interracial interaction: The role of prejudice and metastereotypes. Journal of Social
Issues, 66(2):334–351.​

Fonseca, X., S. Lukosch and F. Brazier
2019​Social cohesion revisited: a new definition and how to characterize it, Innovation.The European Journal ofSocial Science Research, 32(2):231–253.​

Frey, F. E., and L. R. Tropp
2006​

Being seen as individuals versus as group members: Extending research on metaperception to intergroupcontexts. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(3):265–280.​

Fussell, E.
2014

Warmth of the welcome: Attitudes toward immigrants and immigration policy. Annual review of sociology,
40:479.​González, R. and R. Brown
2003​

Generalization of positive attitude as a function of subgroup and superordinate group identifications inintergroup contact. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33(2):195–214.​

Goldberg, D. and P. Williams
1988​A user’s guide to the General Health Questionnaire. UK: NFER-Nelson, Windsor.​​Hainmueller, J. and D. J. Hopkins​
2014​​Public attitudes toward immigration. Annual review of political science:17.​​105

Halevy, N., I. Maoz, P. Vani and E. S. Reit2022

​ here the Blame Lies: Unpacking Groups Into Their Constituent Subgroups Shifts Judgments of Blame in
WIntergroup Conflict.Psychological Science, 33(1):76–89.

Hooghe, M., T. Reeskens, D. Stolle and A. Trappers
2009​ thnic diversity and generalized trust in Europe: A cross-national multilevel study.Comparative political studies,E42(2):198–223.​​Institute for Economics & Peace
2021​​Global Peace Index 2021: Measuring Peace in a Complex World. Institute for Economics & Peace Sydney.​​Jenson, J.
2010​​Defining and Measuring Social Cohesion. Commonwealth Secretariat, London.​

Joyce, N., L. Vincze, L. and E. J. Marton
2016​​ rossing the communication divide: Intergroup contact and the desire to learn the outgroup’s language.
C
Journal of International and Intercultural Communication, 9(4):295–311.​​Kelman, H.C.
1999​

​ he interdependence of Israeli and Palestinian national identities: The role of the other in existential conflicts.
T
Journal of Social Issues, 55(3):581–600.​

2007​​ he Israeli-Palestinian peace process and its vicissitudes: Insights from attitude theory. American Psychologist,
T62(4):287.​​Kinder, D.R., L.M. Sanders and L.M. Sanders
1996​​Divided by color: Racial politics and democratic ideals. University of Chicago Press.​​Knowles, E.D. and L.R. Tropp
2018​ he racial and economic context of Trump support: Evidence for threat, identity, and contact effects in theT2016 Presidential Election. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(3):275–284.​

Leininger, J., F. Burchi, C. Fiedler, K. Mross, D. Nowack, A. von Schiller, C. Sommer, C. Strupat and S. Ziaja
2021​​ ocial cohesion: A new definition and a proposal for its measurement in Africa. Discussion Paper, No. 31/2021.
S
Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE), Bonn.​Markus, A.
2021​​Mapping Social Cohesion 2021: The Scanlon Foundation Surveys Report. Monash University, Melbourne.​

Mousa, S.
2020​​ uilding social cohesion between Christians and Muslims through soccer in post-ISIS Iraq. Science,B369(6505):866–870.​

Noor, M., N. Shnabel, S. Halabi and A. Nadler2012​​ hen suffering begets suffering: The psychology of competitive victimhood between adversarial groups inWviolent conflicts. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16(4):351–374.​

O’Brien, T. C., B. Leidner, and L. R. Tropp
2018​​ re they for us or against us? How intergroup metaperceptions shape foreign policy attitudes. GroupA
Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21(6):941–961.​

2016​​A ​meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of personality and social psychology, 90(5):751.​

Pettigrew, T.F.
1997​​​Generalized intergroup contact effects on prejudice.Personality and social psychology bulletin, 23(2):173–185.​2008​​ uture directions for intergroup contact theory and research.International Journal of intercultural relations,F32(3):187–199.

106

Pettigrew, T.F. and L. Tropp
2011​​When groups meet: the dynamics of intergroup contact.First Edition. Psychology Press, New York.

2016​​A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory.Journal of personality and social psychology, 90(5):751.​​Pierce, S.
2019​​Immigration-related policy changes in the first two years of the Trump administration. Migration Policy Institute.​.​​Plaut, V. C., F. G.Garnett, L. F. Buffardi and J. Sanchez-Burks
2011​“​ What about me?” Perceptions of exclusion and Whites' reactions to multiculturalism. Journal of personality
and social psychology, 101(2):337.​​Rimé, B., P. Kanyangara, V. Yzerbyt and D. Paez
2011​

​ he impact of Gacaca tribunals in Rwanda: Psychosocial effects of participation in a truth and reconciliation
Tprocess after a genocide. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(6):695–706.​​Rocco, S., I. Giammusso, S. Boca and A. Mirisola
2021​​Multilingualism and ethnic prejudice: The mediating role of intergroup contact. Social Psychology, 52(2):90.​​Ron, Y., J. Solomon, E. Halperin, and T. Saguy
2017​​ illingness to engage in intergroup contact: A multilevel approach. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace
W
Psychology, 23(3):210.​​Sapsford, R., P. Abbott, C. Haerpfer and C. Wallace
2015​Trust in post-Soviet countries, ten years on. European Politics and Society, 16(4):523–539.

​Simonsen, K. B.
2017​ oes citizenship always further Immigrants’ feeling of belonging to the host nation? A study of policies andDpublic attitudes in 14 Western democracies. Comparative Migration Studies, 5(1):1–17.​​Schumann, S., O. Klein, K. Douglas and M. Hewstone
2017​ hen is computer-mediated intergroup contact most promising? Examining the effect of out-groupW
members' anonymity on prejudice. Computers in Human Behavior, 77:198–210.​

Stephan, W. G., and C. W. Stephan​
1985​

Intergroup anxiety. Journal of social issues, 41(3):157–175.​​

2000

The measurement of racial and ethnic identity. International journal of intercultural relations, 24(5): 541–552.​​

Stephan, W.G., K.A.Boniecki, O.Ybarra, A.Bettencourt, K.S. Ervin, L.A.Jackson and C. L.Renfro​
2002

The role of threats in the racial attitudes of Blacks and Whites. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
28(9):1242–1254.​​

Syropoulos, S.​​
2020

Personal safety and positive life outcomes: Cross-national evidence from the World Values Survey. Peace andConflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 26(3):281.​​

Tajfel, H. and J.C. Turner​​
1979

An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict. In: The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (W. G. Austin and
S. Worchel, eds.). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Tam, T., M. Hewstone, J. Kenworthy and E. Cairns
2009Intergroup trust in northern Ireland. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(1):45–59.​

107​Tropp, L. R.
2021​Crossing to safety: Attachment processes in intergroup contact.Journal of Social Issues, 77(1):86–104.

​Tropp, L. R., D. G. Okamoto, H. B. Marrow and M. Jones-Correa
2018​ ow contact experiences shape welcoming: Perspectives from US-born and immigrant groups. Social
H
Psychology Quarterly, 81(1):23–47.​​Uslaner, E. M.
2012​ rust, diversity, and segregation in the United States and the United Kingdom. In:Trust (Masamichi S. and R.
T
M. Marsh, eds.). Brill, Leiden.​​Voci, A., M. Hewstone, H. Swart, H. and C. A. Veneziani, C. A.
2015​ efining the association between intergroup contact and intergroup forgiveness in Northern Ireland: Type ofRcontact, prior conflict experience, and group identification.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 18(5):589–
608.​​Vollhardt, J. R. and R. Bilali
2015​ he role of inclusive and exclusive victim consciousness in predicting intergroup attitudes: Findings fromT
Rwanda, Burundi, and DRC. Political Psychology, 36(5):489–506.​​Wagner, U., O.Christ, T.F. Pettigrew, J. Stellmacher and C. Wolf
2006

​ rejudice and minority proportion: Contact instead of threat effects. Social psychology quarterly, 69(4): 380–
P
390.​

White, F.A., I.Borinca, L.Vezzali, K.J. Reynolds, J.K.BlomsterLyshol, S.Verrelliand J. M. Falomir‐Pichastor​
2021

Beyond direct contact: The theoretical and societal relevance of indirect contact for improving intergrouprelations.Journal of Social Issues, 77(1):132–153.​​

White, F. A., R.Maunderand S.Verrelli​
2020

Text-based E-contact: Harnessing cooperative Internet interactions to bridge the social and psychologicaldivide. European Review of Social Psychology, 31(1):76–119.​​

White, C. L., L. R. Tropp, F. Rucinski and C. Tredoux​
2022

I​ntergroup contact and prejudice reduction: Prospects and challenges in changing youth attitudes. Review ofGeneral Psychology, 26(3): 342–360.​

Williamson, A. F.​

2018

Welcoming new Americans?:Local governments and immigrant incorporation. University of Chicago Press.​​

Zagefka, H. and R. Brown, R.​
2002​ he relationship between acculturation strategies, relative fit and intergroup relations: immigrant‐majority
T
relations in Germany. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32(2):171–188.​​

Publications and other material produced by IOM​International Organization for Migration (IOM)
2022​Integration and Social Cohesion​. EMM2.0 Handbook. Geneva.​

2021a​ anual on Community-Based Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Emergencies and Displacement.​​IOM,
M
Geneva.​2021b

T​ he Power of “Contact”. Designing, Facilitating and Evaluating Social Mixing Activities to Strengthen Migrant
Integration and Social Cohesion Between Migrants and Local Communities. A Review of Lessons Learned.​​Geneva.​

2022a​IOM Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines.​​Geneva​

2022b​The Power of Digitalization in the Age of Physical Distancing (DISC Digest 4th Edition).​Geneva.​

1082019a​IOM Glossary on Migration. International Migration Law, No. 34.​​Geneva.​​

2019b​

Migration, Inclusion and Social Cohesion: Challenges, Recent Developments and Opportunities.​In: World
Migration Report 2020. Geneva.​​

2015.​​IOM Data Protection Manual.​Geneva.

n.d.​Integration and Social Cohesion: Key Elements for Reaping the Benefits of Migration. Global Compact thematic paper.​​
Geneva.

Videos and Blogs
Cvent Guest​
2020​ irtual Training: 29 Tips to Maximize Your Sessions. cvent, 07 May. Available atV
https://www.cvent.com/en/blog/hospitality/virtual-training(accessed on 17.10.2022).​​

International Organization for Migration (IOM)​
2021​ he Power of Contact: Fostering Migrant Integration and Social Cohesion through Social Mixing. Available atThttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAw7x7UfwdQ.​​​Reviving Charlottetown’s skating club​2019​Reviving Charlottetown’s skating club. Available at www.youtube.com/watch?v=klH1ZpNCf5o.​​Social Tables​n.d.​​ onday Motivation: Awesome Event Icebreakers Attendees Will Enjoy. Available atM
www.socialtables.com/blog/event-planning/icebreakers-networking-meetings/(accessed on 17.10.2022).​​The Brainwaves Video Anthology
2018​​Linda Tropp - Intergroup Contact Available at www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZMy7nr0aFY&t=5s.​​

109

Websites​​Qualtrics​ ualtrics Topics From A to Z. Available at https://www.qualtrics.com/support/survey-platform/getting-started/qualtricsQ
topics-a-z/ (accessed on 17.10.2022).
​International Organization for Migration (IOM)I​OM Diversity, Inclusion and Social Cohesion (DISC) Initiative. Available at https://www.iom.int/iom-diversity-inclusionand-social-cohesion-disc-initiative (accessed on 17.10.2022).
​GLOBAL COMPACT FOR MIGRATION. Available at www.iom.int/global-compact-migration(accessed on 17.10.2022).
​ TM & Partners Toolkit. Available at https://displacement.iom.int/dtm-toolkit/dtm-partners-toolkit(accessed onD
17.10.2022).
​ ata Protection Available at https://intranetportal/en-us/Pages/data-protection.aspx(accessed on 17.10.2022) (IOM
Dinternal link only).
​DATA PROTECTION. Available at www.iom.int/data-protection(accessed on 17.10.2022).
​IOM Global Migration Data Analysis Centre (GMDAC). Available at https://gmdac.iom.int/(accessed on 17.10.2022).
​ esource Bank on Building Capacity for Diversity and Social Inclusion. Available atRhttps://migration4development.org/en/resources/resource-bank-building-capacity-diversity-and-socialinclusion(accessed on 17.10.2022).
​ urvey Bank on Migrant Integration and Social Cohesion. Available at www.iom.int/resources/survey-bank-migrantS
integration-and-social-cohesion(accessed on 17.10.2022).
I​OM / IPL Migrant Integration Index. Available athttps://iomint.sharepoint.com/sites/DISCCollaborationSpace/SitePages/Measuring-Migrant-Integration-inLAC.aspx(accessed on 17.10.2022).
Kobo
Quick Start Overview. Available at https://support.kobotoolbox.org/quick_start.html(accessed on 17.10.2022).
SCHOOL FORM
What do you need? Visualmini-dictionaryfor refugees.Available at www.sof.edu.pl/en/why-sof/students-projects/1383what-do-you-need-visual-mini-dictionary-for-refugees(accessed on 17.10.2022).
SoliyaConnect Program–Reliably Transformational Virtual Exchange. (2022).Available at https://soliya.net/connectprogram(accessed on22.08.2022).
United Nations
Department of Economic and Social Affairs–Sustainable Development.Available at https://sdgs.un.org/goals(accessed on
17.10.2022).​

110

...

Linda R. Tropp, PhD
Liora Morhayim, MA